IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v9y2010i2p10-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Five Years of Accession: Impacts on Agriculture in the NMS Les cinq années suivant l’adhésion: incidences sur l’agriculture des pays non membres Fünf Jahre Mitgliedschaft: Auswirkungen auf die Landwirtschaft in den neuen Mitgliedsstaaten

Author

Listed:
  • Csaba Csaki
  • Attila Jambor

Abstract

Five Years of Accession: Impacts on Agriculture in the NMS Five years have passed since the accession of Central and Eastern European countries to the EU. This article takes stock of the impacts of accession. On balance it has had an overall positive impact on the NMS, although there have clearly been significant differences in outcomes due to differing initial conditions and endowments, the effectiveness of implementing pre‐ and post‐accession policies and institutions, and the overall macro‐economic situation in each country. Poland, Latvia and Lithuania seem to have been the leading countries in adjusting to EU conditions. EU membership has led to a significant increase in subsidies received by the farmers and thereby to enhanced farmers’ income. The support, however, is not evenly distributed and small farmers remain handicapped in many ways. EU membership has integrated the NMS into a large, rather competitive market offering both opportunities and threats to domestic producers. Trade figures indicate a rather limited ability so far to withstand these competitive pressures. The current CAP is designed and based on the conditions of EU‐15 countries. The experiences of the first five years in the NMS indicate that, even with possible modifications, this system does not fully fit the conditions of these countries, especially their poorest segments. Cinq années se sont écoulées depuis l’adhésion des pays d’Europe centrale et orientale à l’Union européenne (UE). Cet article fait le point sur les incidences de l’adhésion. A tout prendre, elle a eu un effet global positif sur les nouveaux pays membres (NPM), même si les résultats ont varié selon les conditions et les dotations initiales, l’efficacité des politiques et des institutions précédant et suivant l’adhésion, et la situation générale macroéconomique de chaque pays. La Pologne, la Lettonie et la Lituanie ont été les premiers à s’adapter aux conditions de l’UE. L’appartenance à l’UE a conduit à une hausse significative des subventions reçues par les agriculteurs et par conséquent à un renforcement du revenu des exploitants. Cependant, le soutien n’est pas également réparti et les petits agriculteurs continuent à subir divers handicaps. L’appartenance à l’UE a placé les NPM au cœur d’un large marché assez concurrentiel qui offre à la fois des opportunités et des menaces pour les producteurs nationaux. Les chiffres du commerce pointent vers une capacité assez limitée jusqu’à présent à résister à ces pressions concurrentielles. La PAC actuelle est conçue pour et fondée sur la situation de l’UE à 15. L’expérience des cinq premières années dans les NPM montre que, même avec des modifications possibles, ce système ne correspond pas complètement à la situation de ces pays, en particulier pour les éléments les plus pauvres. Vor fünf Jahren sind die mittel‐ und osteuropäischen Länder der EU beigetreten. Dieser Beitrag gibt einen kritischen Überblick über die Auswirkungen des Beitritts. Unter dem Strich hat er sich insgesamt positiv auf die neuen Mitgliedsstaaten ausgewirkt, obgleich die Ergebnisse ohne Frage erheblich unterschiedlich ausgefallen sind aufgrund der abweichenden Bedingungen und Ausstattungen am Anfang, des Umsetzungserfolgs von Politikmaßnahmen und Institutionen vor und nach dem Beitritt sowie der allgemeinen makroökonomischen Situation in jedem Land. Polen, Lettland und Litauen haben bei der Anpassung an die EU‐Bedingungen anscheinend eine Vorreiterrolle eingenommen. Die EU‐Mitgliedschaft brachte den Landwirten einen enormen Subventionsanstieg ein und führte somit zu erhöhten Einkommen in der Landwirtschaft. Die Unterstützung ist jedoch nicht gleichmäßig verteilt, und kleinere Landwirte sind nach wie vor in vielerlei Hinsicht benachteiligt. Durch ihre EU‐Mitgliedschaft wurden die neuen Mitgliedsstaaten in einen großen, relativ wettbewerbsintensiven Markt eingebunden, der für einheimische Erzeuger sowohl Möglichkeiten eröffnet als auch Bedrohungen darstellt. Die Handelszahlen belegen eine bislang eher eingeschränkte Fähigkeit, diesem Wettbewerbsdruck standzuhalten. Die aktuelle GAP wurde entworfen mit Blick auf die Bedingungen der EU‐15‐Länder. Die Erfahrungen aus den ersten fünf Jahren in den neuen Mitgliedsstaaten zeigen, dass dieses System selbst mit möglichen Änderungen nicht vollkommen zu den Bedingungen dieser Länder passt, insbesondere nicht in ihren ärmsten Teilen.

Suggested Citation

  • Csaba Csaki & Attila Jambor, 2010. "Five Years of Accession: Impacts on Agriculture in the NMS Les cinq années suivant l’adhésion: incidences sur l’agriculture des pays non membres Fünf Jahre Mitgliedschaft: Auswirkungen auf die Landwir," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 10-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:9:y:2010:i:2:p:10-17
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00164.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00164.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00164.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Swinnen, Johan F.M. & Rozelle, Scott, 2006. "From Marx and Mao to the Market: The Economics and Politics of Agricultural Transition," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199288915.
    2. Lerman, Zvi, 2007. "Agricultural Recovery in CIS: Lessons of 15 Years of Land Reform and Farm Restructuring," 104th Seminar, September 5-8, 2007, Budapest, Hungary 8530, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Monasterolo, Irene, 2012. "Analysing the effect of the EU membership on agricultural and rural areas: the case of Hungary," Rural Areas and Development, European Rural Development Network (ERDN), vol. 9, pages 1-21.
    2. Monasterolo, Irene & Pagliacci, Francesco, 2011. "Mapping changes on agricultural and rural areas: an ex-post evaluation of the EU membership for Hungary," 122nd Seminar, February 17-18, 2011, Ancona, Italy 98988, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kym Anderson & Johan Swinnen, 2008. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Europe's Transition Economies," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6502.
    2. Swinnen, J.F.M. & Maertens, M., 2007. "From Public to Private Governance in Agri-food Supply Chains of Transition and Developing Countries," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.
    3. Petrick, Martin & Götz, Linde, 2019. "Herd growth, farm organisation and subsidies in the dairy sector of Russia and Kazakhstan," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 70(3), pages 789-811.
    4. Johan F. M. Swinnen & Miet Maertens, 2007. "Globalization, privatization, and vertical coordination in food value chains in developing and transition countries," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 89-102, December.
    5. Spoor Max, 2018. "25 Years of Rural Development in post-Soviet Central Asia: Sustaining Inequalities," Eastern European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 24(1), pages 63-79, December.
    6. Alessandro Olper & Jan Fałkowski & Johan Swinnen, 2014. "Political Reforms and Public Policy: Evidence from Agricultural and Food Policies," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 21-47.
    7. Mylène Gaulard, 2014. "Les dangers de la bulle immobilière chinoise," Revue Tiers-Monde, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 77-96.
    8. Petrick, Martin & Wandel, Jürgen & Karsten, Katharina, 2013. "Rediscovering the Virgin Lands: Agricultural Investment and Rural Livelihoods in a Eurasian Frontier Area," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 164-179.
    9. Olivia Riera & Johan Swinnen, 2016. "Cuba's Agricultural Transition and Food Security in a Global Perspective," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 413-448.
    10. Theesfeld Insa & Klümper Frederike, 2016. "Interplay between structural change in Central Asian agriculture and institutional scarcity of land and water: evidence from Tajikistan," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 60(1-2), pages 81-96, June.
    11. Varga, Mihai, 2022. "Getting the “basics”? The World Bank’s narrative construction of poverty reduction in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    12. repec:lic:licosd:16906 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Giovanni Bigazzi, 2007. "The Role Of Agriculture In The Development Of The People’S Republic Of China," Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia, Finanza e Statistica 36/2007, Università di Perugia, Dipartimento Economia.
    14. Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott, 2010. "Agricultural Development, Nutrition, and the Policies Behind China’s Success," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-34, June.
    15. Paweł Boczar & Lucyna Błażejczyk-Majka, 2024. "Economic Efficiency versus Energy Efficiency of Selected Crops in EU Farms," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, September.
    16. Rob Kuijpers & Johan Swinnen, 2016. "Value Chains and Technology Transfer to Agriculture in Developing and Emerging Economies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1403-1418.
    17. Petrick, Martin, 2021. "Post-Soviet agricultural restructuring: A success story after all?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63(4), pages 623-647.
    18. Marianne Fay & Rachel I. Block & Jane Ebinger, 2010. "Adapting to Climate Change in Eastern Europe and Central Asia," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2407.
    19. Herath, Deepananda & Weersink, Alfons, 2009. "From Plantations to Smallholder Production: The Role of Policy in the Reorganization of the Sri Lankan Tea Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 1759-1772, November.
    20. Petrick, Martin, 2014. "Modernising Russia's cattle and dairy sectors under WTO conditions: Insights from East Germany," IAMO Discussion Papers 184335, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    21. Brosig, Stephan & Glauben, Thomas & Levkovych, Inna & Prehn, Sören & Teuber, Ramona, 2016. "Are we moving towards functioning agricultural markets and trade relations?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 67(3), pages 677-684.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:9:y:2010:i:2:p:10-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.