STATE AID IN THE AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY SECTORS AND IN RURAL AREAS IN RESPECT OF THE COMPETITION POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE YEARS 2004-2015

2017 ◽  
Vol XIX (3) ◽  
pp. 250-257
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Rutkiewicz ◽  
Angelika Pruchnicka
Keyword(s):  
Rural Areas ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Public Expenditures ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Territorial Development ◽  
Adverse Weather ◽  
The Eu

The aim of the study is to discuss the legal and economic aspects of granting of state aid in the sectors of agriculture, forestry and in rural areas in the light of the EU competition policy in the years 2004-2015. The methods of deduction, descriptive, critical-cognitive and comparative analysis of statistical data (derived from Eurostat database) on the value and structure of state aid for sectoral targets in the EU-28, were used. State aid in the EU is the instrument aimed at achieving the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy, which strengthens the competitiveness and profitability of all agricultural branches, promotes the sustainable forest management and territorial development of rural areas, stimulating the actions in the field of climate and energy efficiency. The greatest beneficiaries of state aid in the agricultural sector in the years 2004- 2015 were: France (16%), Germany (12%), Finland (10%), Italy (9%), Spain (8%), Poland (7%), Great Britain (6%) and Netherlands (5%). In the structure of state aid in the EU-28 Member States, tax exemptions were the predominant use (14%), followed by investments in agricultural holdings (13.6%), support to the livestock sector (8%), animal disease control (6%), agricultural and livestock insurance contributions (5.4%), technical support (5%), forestry support (4.8%), aid for research & development & innovation (4.7%), adverse weather events (4%), public expenditures for environmental protection and compensations for natural disasters and other exceptional occurrences (3.5% each).

A NUTS 2 Level Cluster Analysis of EAFRD Submeasure 4.1 Implementation in Romania and Poland

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 48-58
Author(s):  
Alexandru Sin ◽  
Czesław Nowak ◽  
Ion Burlacu
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Rural Development ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Territorial Development ◽  
Rural Economies ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Level Cluster

Rural development is an important part of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union, as the Second Pillar of CAP, covering a wide range of actions, aimed at achieving a balanced territorial development of rural economies and communities. Previous studies highlighted significant similarities between Romania and Poland, regarding agricultural sector and rural areas. A k-mean cluster analysis was performed on Romanian and Polish NUTS2 regions, in order to identify common problems and examples of good practices. The analysis considered five clusters, built over a dataset of four variables: EAFRD investments in farms per capita, share of agricultural output in GDP, utilized agricultural area, and GDP per capita. Out of the five clusters, only one presented a balanced composition of Romanian and Polish regions, also representing a good example of attracting rural development funds where they're mostly needed.

scholarly journals Environmental aspects of agricultural policies of the European Union countries

2021 ◽  
pp. 136-144
Author(s):  
Anna Lytvynchuk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Food Security ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
State Support ◽  
Agricultural Producers ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
The Eu

At present, the state of the economy of the agricultural sector in many countries of the world, including in the countries of the European Union (EU), inherent in developed industry, has led to the transition to a new environmentally oriented agricultural policy. An important role is assigned to state support of agricultural producers, through subsidies, preferential credit policy, and in some countries, the complete abolition of taxation of entrepreneurial activity in rural areas, which confirms the relevance and national economic significance of the article. In domestic agroeconomic science and practice, there is no scientific concept of state participation in the process of bringing the agricultural sector out of the crisis. Research objectives – consider the development policy of the agricultural sector of the EU countries; study the level of state support for agricultural producers. The purpose of the work is to consider the degree of development of the agricultural policy of the EU countries in the context of ensuring food security. The methods and methodology of the research were general scientific, particular methods of cognition, including the historical and logical, the method of observation and comparison. Shows the main approaches to state regulation of the development of the agro-industrial sector at the level of the European Union as a whole and in the context of member countries; characteristic features and principles that determine the success and integrity of a unified agricultural policy; factors contributing to the productivity of agricultural land; agro-ecological requirements restricting the import of genetically modified products; the main tasks in the development of a new policy of the agrarian sector of the economy; priority directions of regulation of measures to support agricultural producers, integrated development of rural areas, increasing the competitiveness of the EU agricultural sector. The practical significance of the work lies in the fact that this study will allow the state bodies of Belarus to better understand how it is necessary to form an agricultural policy in the context of ensuring food security.

Agricultural Development in European Union: Drivers, Challenges and Perspectives

2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (4II) ◽  
pp. 565-580
Author(s):  
Laura Giurca Vasilescu
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rural Development ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Rural Development Policy ◽  
The Eu

Globalisation of world trade, consumer-led quality requirements and EU enlargement are the new realities and challenges facing European agriculture today. The changes will affect not only agricultural markets, but also local economies in rural areas. The future of the agricultural sector is closely linked to a balanced development of rural areas. The Community dimension in this relationship is therefore clear: agricultural and rural policy have an important role to play in the cohesion of EU territorial, economic and social policy. With over 56 percent of the population in the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU) living in rural areas, which cover 91 percent of the territory, rural development is a vitally important policy area. Farming and forestry remain crucial for land use and the management of natural resources in the EU’s rural areas, and as a platform for economic diversification in rural communities. The strengthening of EU rural development policy is, therefore, an overall EU priority. The European Union has an active rural development policy because this helps to achieve valuable goals for the country sides and for the people who live and work there. The policy is funded partly from the central EU budget and partly from individual Member States' national or regional budgets. Theoretically, individual EU Member States could decide and operate completely independent rural development policies. However, this approach would work poorly in practice. Not all countries in the EU would be able to afford the policy which they needed and many of the issues addressed through rural development policy do not divide up neatly at national or regional boundaries. Also, rural development policy has links to a number of other policies set at EU level. Therefore, the EU has a common rural development policy, which nonetheless places considerable control in the hands of individual Member States and regions. The EU’s rural development policy is all about meeting the challenges faced by our rural areas, and unlocking their potential.

scholarly journals Approaches to formation of strategies for development of administrative territories

2019 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 06026
Author(s):  
Oleksii Klok ◽  
Olha Loseva ◽  
Oleksandr Ponomarenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Strategic Management ◽  
Development Strategy ◽  
Regional Policy ◽  
Swot Analysis ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Territorial Development ◽  
Smart Specialization ◽  
The Eu

The article studies theoretical and methodological bases of the strategic management of the development of administrative territories, considers the essence of strategic management and formulates the advantages of using it in management of administrative territory. Based on the analysis of the key provisions of the EU regional policy, the strategy of “smart specialization” is considered as the most common approach to territorial development. Using the experience of the countries of the European Union as a basis, a BPMN diagram, describing the conceptual bases for the formation of a competitive territory strategy, was built. Practical approaches to the formation of strategies for the development of administrative territories operating in Ukraine, regulatory acts, in particular, that had a direct impact on the formation of the existing model of strategic territorial management, were analyzed. The main requirements to the content of the strategic plan were considered and the list of key provisions and analytical methods (socio-economic analysis, comparative analysis, SWOT-analysis, PESTLE-analysis, sociological analysis) was formulated. Using the comparative legal analysis of the experience of the European Union as a basis, a number of features can be highlighted that must be taken into account in the process of forming the administrative territory development strategy.

scholarly journals Economic and financial position of agricultural enterprises in the period before the accession to the European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (No. 11) ◽  
pp. 486-494
Author(s):  
Z. Chrastinová
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Agricultural Products ◽  
Cold Weather ◽  
Business Success ◽  
Agricultural Cooperatives ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Adverse Weather ◽  
Legal Entities

In the year before the accession to the European Union, the Slovak agricultural sector reported a loss of SKK 2.4 billion and following a profitable year, the earnings were reduced by SKK 2.8 billion. The situation was caused by a number of reasons, namely reduced sales of agricultural products, damage resulting from adverse weather effects (cold weather, hail, drought and  swine fever), as well as widening of the price gap compared to the year before (increasing input prices in agriculture and decreasing purchase prices of agricultural products, especially in livestock production). Legal entities and natural persons experienced mixed business success. While 51% of legal entities made profit, the figure rose to 76% in the group of natural persons. Both the agricultural cooperatives and trading companies performed with a loss. The loss per hectare of agricultural land (a.l.) was substantially lower in the case of business companies. Natural persons - private farmers were profitable over the period. The gap between the profitable and loss-making enterprises has widened. Some 60% of profitable enterprises owned by legal entities made only a small profit below SKK 0.5 million. The loss-making performance was typical for more productive areas of Slovakia. This was related to stronger effects of adverse climate in 2003.

scholarly journals Economic and Environmental Consequences of the ECJ Genome Editing Judgment in Agriculture

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1212
Author(s):  
Alexander Gocht ◽  
Nicola Consmüller ◽  
Ferike Thom ◽  
Harald Grethe
Keyword(s):  
Genome Editing ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Food Products ◽  
Food Prices ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Genome-edited crops are on the verge of being placed on the market and their agricultural and food products will thus be internationally traded soon. National regulations, however, diverge regarding the classification of genome-edited crops. Major countries such as the US and Brazil do not specifically regulate genome-edited crops, while in the European Union, they fall under GMO legislation, according to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). As it is in some cases impossible to analytically distinguish between products from genome-edited plants and those from non-genome-edited plants, EU importers may fear the risk of violating EU legislation. They may choose not to import any agricultural and food products based on crops for which genome-edited varieties are available. Therefore, crop products of which the EU is currently a net importer would become more expensive in the EU, and production would intensify. Furthermore, an intense substitution of products covered and not covered by genome editing would occur in consumption, production, and trade. We analyzed the effects of such a cease of EU imports for cereals and soy in the EU agricultural sector with the comparative static agricultural sector equilibrium model CAPRI. Our results indicate dramatic effects on agricultural and food prices as well as on farm income. The intensification of EU agriculture may result in negative net environmental effects in the EU as well as in an increase in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This suggests that trade effects should be considered when developing domestic regulation for genome-edited crops.

scholarly journals Competition Law and State Aid for Failing Banks in the EU and its Specific Implications for CEE Member States

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (14) ◽  
pp. 145-157
Author(s):  
Virág Blazsek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Bank Bailouts ◽  
The Eu

The bank bailouts following the global financial crisis of 2008 have been subject to prior approval of the European Commission (EC), the competition authority of the European Union. The EC was reluctant to reject rescue efforts directed at failing banks and so it consistently approved all such requests submitted by Member States. Out of the top twenty European banks, the EC authorized State aid to at least twelve entities. In this context, the paper outlines the gradually changing interpretation of EU State aid rules, the “temporary and extraordinary rules” introduced starting from late 2008, and the extension of the “no-State aid” category. The above shifts show that the EC itself deflected from relevant EU laws in order to systemically rescue important banks in Europe and restore their financial stability. The paper argues that bank bailouts and bank rescue packages by the State have led to different effects on market structures and consumer welfare in the Eurozone and non-Eurozone areas, mostly the Eastern segments of the European Union. As such, it is argued that they are inconsistent with the European common market. Although the EC tried to minimize the distortion of competition created as a result of the aforementioned case law primarily through the application of the principle of exceptionality and different compensation measures, these efforts have been at least partially unsuccessful. Massive State aid packages, the preferential treatment of the largest, or systemically important, banks through EU State aid mechanisms – almost none of which are Central and Eastern European (CEE) – may have led to the distortion of competition on the common market. That is so mainly because of the prioritization of the stability of the financial sector and the Euro. The paper argues that State aid for failing banks may have had important positive effects in the short run, such as the promotion of the stability of the banking system and the Euro. In the longrun however, it has contributed to the unprecedented sovereign indebtedness in Europe, and contributed to an increased economic and political instability of the EU, particularly in its most vulnerable CEE segment.

scholarly journals Identyfikacja sposobów implementacji II filaru WPR w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej

2018 ◽  
pp. 109-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Pawłowski ◽  
Wawrzyniec Czubak
Keyword(s):  
Rural Areas ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Time Range ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Rural Development Program ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Impact

The 2nd pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy plays a very significant role in shaping the image of a modern, European village. It’s impact on the development of agriculture and rural areas seems to be obvious, for example because of the place it occupies in the structure of the European Union budget. However, it’s very important to precisely determine the effects of its implementation. Therefore, in this article the main goal was to show the reasons for diversifying the implementation of the Rural Development Program 2007–2013 in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Against the background of differences in the economic and production situation of the agricultural sector, the design of the Programs was evaluated and it’s impact on changes in the agricultural sectors of these countries was compared. To show the impact of the funds of the second pillar of the CAP, the time range presenting changes in agriculture covers the years before and after integration. Based on them, a comparison of the implemented activities and the structure of their financing has been made.

scholarly journals Navigating Through the Maze: Practical Constraints in the Implementation of Forest Regulations (FLEGT) in Ghana

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 31
Author(s):  
Gordon Kofi Sarfo-Adu
Keyword(s):  
Value Chain ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
Tracking System ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Implementation Challenges ◽  
Technical Errors ◽  
Public Policy Implementation ◽  
Transnational Actors ◽  
The Eu

The European Union Forest Law Enforcement on Governance and Trade (EU-FLEGT) Action Plan seeks to promote widespread sustainable forest management and relies largely on transnational actors and international law in its operationalization. The EU FLEGT sets out EU custom regulation through Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) which is a bilateral agreement between the EU and wood exporting countries with instruments aimed at promoting sustainable practices within the forest resources value chain. Ghana became a signatory to the FLEGT VPA since 2007, as part of the process, it is required to use technology to track timber logging from source to point of export. Issues of networks and inter-agency collaboration and dealing with human elements remain crucial in ensuring effective operationalization. Adopting a qualitative case study design as well as theories and concepts from the public policy implementation literature, this study examines the implementation vagaries of the FLEGT VPA in Ghana. Although the VPA is a laudable idea of using Information Technology (IT) in effectively tracking timber to its original source to ascertain legality or otherwise of the timber, the needed IT infrastructure and resources have not matched up with the goal. Additionally, the VPA implementation is expensive and has come with additional cost to the implementers, The study further observes that the increasing ‘red flags’ that are raised on the Ghana Wood Tracking System is a blend of technical errors emanating from negligence or capacity challenges and human manipulation. This calls for regular consultations and workshops with relevant stakeholders in order to assess which skills are deficient and a need to beef up through on-the-job training. The domestic market and trading activities tend to fuel demand for illegal timber hence a constraint to the full realization of the VPA objective. The study makes policy suggestions on how to address these implementation challenges.

FEATURES OF EU AGRICULTURAL POLICY: OPPORTUNITIES FOR UKRAINE

2020 ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Oleksii Hryhorovych Korytnyi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Market Competition ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The need for constant monitoring of existing practices to improve the efficiency of the agricultural sector and identify important guidelines for further development of this area.Using modern experience of EU countries to increase the efficiency of the national agricultural sector.Practical and theoretical issues of development of the agricultural sector and the use of existing practical experience in this field were considered by O. Borodin, O. Bublienko, V. Granovska, N. Karaseva, I. Klymenko, R. Kosodiy, M. Skoryk and others.Active development of economic processes in the agricultural sector requires current research on the existing practical experience of developed countries.Analysis of practical experience in ensuring the effective functioning of the agricultural sector of the EU.An effective direction of the transition to sustainable development of rural areas is organic production (regulatory principles are reflected in the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU). The institutional norms of the CAP EU act as a guarantor of positive transformations and a "substitute" for the interests of producers in conditions of market competition. In practice, the Council and the EU Commission are responsible for implementing the common policy. European policy for the development of the agricultural sector is funded by the European Agrarian Fund for Rural Development. EU countries use various mechanisms (subsidies, grants, state loan guarantees, etc.) for the development of the agricultural sector. The best results in the direction of sustainable development of the agricultural sector were achieved by countries that took radical steps quickly, decisively, comprehensively. The experience of the EU countries shows that it is also justified to limit government intervention in this sector, or to implement it through market-type mechanisms

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document