Romania
• General country description
• A. First pillar: implementation of CAP reforms (2003)
• B. Second pillar: implementation of RDP measures during 2007-2013
• C. Vision for the CAP beyond 2013: a short overview of the debate (at Member State level) on future CAP reform
• D. Literature, sources, references
• The comparative analysis provides a compact overview of CAP implementation across all 27 Member States and their visions of the future of the CAP
General country discription
Romania |
Comparison with EU-25 |
Population, 2005 (*1,000,000): 21.7 |
|
Population density, 2003 (inh./km2): 91 |
118 in EU-25 |
GDP/capita, 2005 (PPS): 7,800 |
33% of GDP/capita in EU-25 |
Share agriculture in total employment, 2002 (%): 38 |
5% in EU-25 |
Share Utilized Agricultural Area in total land area, 2003 (%): 47.7 |
46% in EU-25 in 1998 |
Average farm size, 2005 (ha): 2 |
19 in EU-15 |
Number of farms, 2005 (*1000): 1211.8 |
|
Source: own calculations based on Eurostat
Distribution of farming types, 2005 (% of total)
Source: own calculations based on Eurostat
EU funding for the Single Payment Scheme (SPS)
and the second pillar, 2007-2013
Funding according to CAP budget including Bulgaria and Romania.
Sources: Agra Europe (2007); CEU (2006); EC (2007a)
A. First pillar: implementation CAP reform (2003)
A.1 Single Payment Scheme
Model
SAPS
Coupling measures
Separate sugar payments
A.2 EU budget for Single Payment Scheme (SPS) per year (National ceiling) 2005-2013
Source: 2005: EC (2006); 2006-2013: CEU (2006) and Agra Europe (2007)
Share of the farms that receive SPS of the total number of farms (% of total)
No information
Tradability of SPS
No information
A.3 Cross-compliance: Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions (GAEC)
Source: IEEP, 2005
Selected standards of the GAEC
No information
Reason for selection of cross compliance standards
No information
A.4 Further reform of market regulations
Wine
- Romania, as wine-growing country, considers that the wine CMO reform must prioritize three directions: quality, market and communication. It is necessary to maintain a specific wine CMO which will lead to competitiveness and sustainability of the European wine sector and to maintain a wine CMO's financial sheet similar to the present one.
- The programmes of restructuring and conversion of vineyards and belonging measures must be preserved, as a lever to fulfill the quality and control objectives.
- Romania does not agree with the Commission's approach of using the grubbing up scheme as an instrument for managing production capacity and would like to avoid the situation when MS production capacity will be determined by requests for grubbing-up measures. On a global competitive market, where EU's imports have increased, a special attention must be given to increase the productivity and not to eliminate assumed structural surpluses.
- Another sensitive issue of the reform is the proposal to remove the ban on new plantings. For certain areas planting rights represent the main instrument to determine the supply and demand equilibrium and we consider that total liberalization of planting rights will not lead to the balance foreseen by the Commission's proposal.
- The new European wine market policy aims to simplify the presentation, labelling and wine quality classification rules; these reform proposals are fully supported by Romania.
Fruit and vegetables
- In the new Member States, fruits and vegetables producers are less organized. Generally, the size of a farm in the new Member States is quite small compared to other Member States, this being a particular feature of the fruit and vegetables sector.
- The 5 years transition period used by the producer groups from the new Member States to become a Producer Organization, in accordance with a preliminary recognition plan, is very short, considering the small size and low marketed production volume of fruit and vegetables' farms belonging to a producer group.
- Taking into account the financial situation of the small producers of fruit and vegetables from the New Member States, as well as their need to make some significant investments in order to raise their competitiveness and keep their market activities, these producers are very vulnerable to eventual crisis situations on the market.
- If the crisis management is carried out only through Producer Organizations, most of fruit and vegetables' producers who are affected by market crisis will have no access to crisis management tools; in particular producers from the New Member States will be most neglected. Thus there are few chances for strong financially-sustainable Producer Organizations to be created in the New Member States. Moreover, the New Member States will have big disadvantages in comparison with the other Member States which have a more advanced level of organization.
- It is necessary to provide producer groups an additional financial support for preliminary recognition plans that could be used in case market future crisis occur. This support could be available for the transition period accepted by Producer Groups. Decision made in Agricultural Council meeting in June 2007: Complete decoupling of processing of fruit and vegetables within 4 years for tomatoes and within 5 years for permanent crops (e.g. citrus). Role of producer organisation strengthened, especially in crisis prevention and -management. If SAPS is used in the new MS, the country is allowed to introduce a separate payment system for fruit and vegetables and a suitable reference period.
Decoupling of other products, like tobacco, hops etc.
In line with the reform.
Simplification into one market regulation
Romania is concerned about the functioning of the single Management Committee, about the optional system for import licenses and about the safeguarding measures.
B. Second pillar: implementation of RDP measures 2007-2013
B.1 Description of RDP
There is one national RDP. Situation August 1: the Romanian RDP is expected to be approved in the second half of 2007.
B.2 Emphasis within axes 1, 2, 3 and 4
(distribution of the budget over the axes)
Figures excluding Technical Assistance
Source: Own calculations based on Ministerul Agriculturii, Padurilor si Dezvoltariii Rurale din Romania (2007)
B.3 Leader
The Leader approach will contribute to the accomplishment of Axis 1 and 3 objectives through a local integrated development strategies and innovative actions. Currently, discussions take place regarding the integration of Leader approach in Axis 2 (Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural Development, 2007).
B.4 Local Action Groups (LAGs)
It is intended to create about 80 LAGs, covering 70% of the rural area (Ministerul Agriculturii, Padurilor si Dezvoltariii Rurale din Romania, 2007). Currently, one can not speak about the existence of LAGs in Romania until the RDP approval. After that moment, a selection process will occur. However, at this stage, 120 representatives of sub-regional territories were selected and trained through a PHARE project. These selected territories cover 37 of the 42 Romanian counties.*
B.5 RDP budget
Budgets regional RDPs in Romania 2007-2013 (million euros)
% of co-financing may vary per axis
Source: Ministerul Agriculturii, Padurilor si Dezvoltariii Rurale din Romania (2007)
B.6 Less Favoured Areas
Not yet finalised. Approval of the designation criteria for Less Favoured Areas (LFA) is one part of the RDP approval process for Romania as a new MS. **
B.7 Drivers of RDP Strategy
Try to implement EU rural development priorities as an addition to the national policy.
* Information provided by Elena Abagiu, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Romania, Bucharest.
** Information provided by Helen Williams, Rural Development Desk Officer, DG Agri, European Commission, Brussels.
C. Vision on the CAP beyond 2013*
C.1 Stages in the development of the CAP debate
Is there a debate about the CAP beyond 2013?
Yes, discussions regarding the CAP beyond 2013 take place among ministries, research institutes, farmers' organizations and NGOs at national, regional as well as at local level. Due to the recent accession, the discussions are in an initial phase with the emphasis on exploring which elements of the Romanian policies are similar to the CAP.
C. 2 Key issues in the debate
Components and role of the CAP (Agra Europe, 2007; Financial Times, 2007)
- CAP should stress on much more than agricultural traditional activities;
- Special attention should be paid to environmental issues, support schemes for rural communities and assistance granted to the rural economy in order to transform the rural space in an area having more leisure and environment functions;
- A sustainable management of forests;
- Diversification towards non-agricultural activities.
Organization of the CAP (1st and 2nd pillar)
No information
Financing of the CAP
No information
* Information provided by Anda Popescu, Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands - Romania, Office of the Agricultural Attaché.
D. Literature, sources, references
- Agra Europe (2007), "Threat of SFP cuts rises as NMS accede", Agra Europe Weekly, January 12
- Council of the European Union (CEU) (2005), Proposal for a Council Regulation on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) - redefinition of intermediate less-favoured areas, Brussels, Working Party on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development, working document (7971/05), 15 April
- Council of the European Union (CEU) (2006), Council Regulation 1782/2003 (consolidated version - August 5, 2006), Annex VIII and VIIIa, Brussels
- European Commission (EC) (2006), 35th Financial Report on the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee section, 2005 Financial Year, SEC(2006)1152
- European Commission (EC) (2007a), EU support for rural development 2007-2013; Pre-allocated funding under Heading 2 "Natural Resources" of the Financial Framework, Brussels: European Commission
- European Commission (EC) (2007b), Overview of the implementation of direct payments under the CAP in Member States Version November2007, EC, DG for Agriculture and Rural Development
- Ministerul Agriculturii, Padurilor si Dezvoltariii Rurale din Romania (2007), Programul National Pentru Dezvoltare Rurala 2007-2013, version April 2007
- Ministry of Agriculture Forests and Rural Development (2007), National Strategy Plan for Rural Development 2007-2013, version March 2007
