Interest Groups In European Agriculture

Graduation Thesis

Interest Groups in European Agriculture

Coordinator,

Prof. univ. dr. Dan Luca

Student,

Veria Ștefana- Maria

Content

Introduction

Chapter I: The link between EU agricultural area and Romania’s agricultural situation.

Agricultural and rural development or regress in European Union?

CAP and its step by step evolution: are gates opening during the consolidation of European Union?

Instructions for unrevealing agricultural puzzle: European Legislation and Politics included in the CAP post-2013.

Under the curtain of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development: contribution and implication in national and European development.

Struggling between having national resources and properly exploiting them.

Chapter II: European Agricultural Interest Groups

2.1 The concept of interest groups: following personal interest or running after achieving national development.

2.2 The involvement of the main actors on the European scene of agricultural policy.

2.3 Representation in Romania of those actors identified as active in the European space.

2.4 Security, viability and sustainability of National and European Agriculture assured by interest groups.

Chapter III: Case study. Interest Groups and their specific sub-politics

3.1.1 Brewers of Europe

3.1.2 Berarii României

3.2.1 CEEV – Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins

3.2.2 PNVV – Patronatul Național al Viei și Vinului

3.3.1 Spirits Europe

3.3.2 Spirits România

3.4.1 FoodDrinkEurope – Food and Drinks Industry Confederation in UE

3.4.2 Romalimenta

3.5.1 COCERAL – Cereals Traders Committee

3.5.2 A.R.C.P.A – Asociația Română a Comercianților de Produse Agricole

3.6.1. COPA- COGECA

3.6.2 Federația Națională PRO AGRO

3.7.1 ECPA – European Association of Plant Protection Industry

3.7.2 AIPROM – Asociația Industriei de Protecția Plantelor din România

3.8.1 Fertilizers Europe – European Association of Fertilization Products Manufacturers in Agriculture

3.8.2 Azomureș

3.9.1 FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation

3.9.2 ANFNC – Asociația Națională a Fabricanților de Nutrețuri Combinate

3.10.1 ESA – European Seed Association

3.10.2 AISR – Alianța Industriei Semințelor din România

3.10.3 AMSEM – Asociația Ameliatorilor, Producătorilor și Comercianților de Sămânță și Material Săditor din România

Conclusions

Bibliography

Annexes

Introduction

The purpose of this thesis is to underline the importance of the agricultural sphere for the development of European states, the bonds created between agriculture, economy, politics and social area. In a country that benefits of the needed resources, where rivers, mountains, hills and different types of fertile land are gathered to favor seedlings and to represent the farmers’ weapons, we need legislative support in order to create the most appropriate sub-politics.

Regarding the present situation of interest groups in general, our aim is to emphasize the differences between our national interest groups and other European organizations involved in defending and protecting farmers’ rights, rural and agricultural development. Based on Common Agriculture Policy our research will show us the gaps between the real situation and the desirable one. The research is split in two parts, the theoretical approach having as objectives to understand if history helped us to progress, to point out which are our chances to attain a maximum level by focusing our efforts and by accepting the European influence inside our state. How close to the European model are we as a member state and how interest groups contributed during time to this continuous cycle of growths and decreases? The second part represented by the case study is essential because we gathered evidences anchored in reality and based on examples about how much our national agriculture interest groups are struggling to cope with the European legislation and European institutions in order to achieve the best results for our rural environment, for our economy and for our labor force.

Moreover, using as research method the press analyze and adding the statements of some representatives of our national agriculture associations, our goal was to obtain valid and real results, presenting the mission and objectives of the most important interest groups of this branch, balancing both negative aspects and issues and also benefits and opportunities for Romania, as one of the Union member state. Analyzing European associations from agriculture industry and its Romanian representatives, our goal is to underline how well are our state interests represented at Brussels in strong collaboration with mass media and how much visibility and influence power they managed to obtain since their founding. Presenting and describing some of the most important and visible interest groups inside the Union, concerning the agricultural sphere and their Romanian representatives, we will draw the first segments on the map. Two research questions are established from the beginning as foundation of this thesis. Are Romanian agriculture interest groups involved as much as possible in representing us at Brussels and in regulating our sub-politics? Do they have the power and influence on one hand and the resources and vision on the other hand to pull the trigger for a stable development in agriculture? Our research will respond to these two questions and some more in order to elucidate the current Romania’s position on the European table.

Chapter I: The link between EU agricultural area and Romania’s agricultural situation

While the European space represents a huge box of natural resources essential for the development of agricultural sphere, the bridge on which we are willing to pass is not stable. Even if its foundation is built along with the European Union born, the course is dictated by the continuous changing environment. Through environment I am not referring only to physical mutation such as climate change or natural resources, but also to the other dimension, which involves the fast technological development, the economic carrousel and the social and political puzzle.

The European picture can be basically compared with a concentration of people (the 28 countries) gathered with the same purpose, coping with each other in order to achieve the common goal while satisfying their personal interests, under the same rules. In any team, one of them are more experienced than others, driven by different ideologies and personal habits, but when they come in touch, they become the same entity which aim to perform and to handle the external difficulties which in this case are the changings we previously mentioned. It is said that you can defeat your enemies with their own weapons, if you discover their weaknesses. Particularly speaking, if you are almost sunk in a financial crisis, for example, your anchor will be the most affected sector stroked by it.

The agricultural scene didn’t have a linear evolution. It was exactly like the geographical image of Romania, reaching over the years the mountains heights and returning then to the draw’s depth. The painting of European agriculture was like a travel over the Romanian landform, meeting in your way over and over again unknown places and unreached stages of development. “Farming is important for the EU's natural environment. Farming and nature influence each other: farming has contributed over the centuries to creating and maintaining a unique countryside. Agricultural land management has been a positive force for the development of the rich variety of landscapes and habitats. The ecological integrity and the scenic value of landscapes make rural areas attractive for the establishment of enterprises, for places to live, and for the tourist and recreation businesses.”

Agricultural and rural development or regress in European Union?

A short incursion in the agriculture’s history should be noted, from the beginning of the first forms of human settlements. If we review our past, we will see the huge evolution made by people congregation, when work tools and methods of practicing agriculture were not even dreamed. “It isn't until after 9,500 B.C.E. that the eight so-called founder crops of agriculture appear: first emmer and einkorn wheat, then hulled barley, peas, lentils, bitter vetch, chick peas, and flax.”

While people and systems evolved, among more opportunities of development population grown, the elementary human needs raised and each country born, encountered a bigger need of clinching internal resources of living. Middle Ages for example are characterized by a European stagnation regarding agriculture, while an essentially modern agricultural system became central to economic life and organization in the Arab caliphates, replacing the largely export driven Roman model. We presented this summed up information in order to better understand why agriculture gain such a big importance, starting from an essential human necessity and growing as a main factor in a society accession, covering all existent aspects, economic, social and politic.

Evolution’s voice is represented by industrial agriculture characterized through the rapid rise of mechanization in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the discovery of vitamins, chemical elements such as nitrogen, phosphorus, antibiotics or pesticides and the borrowing process between cultures. Numbers can speak for themselves in this case: “agricultural production across the world doubled four times between 1820 and 1975. It doubled between 1820 and 1920; between 1920 and 1950; between 1950 and 1965; and again between 1965 and 1975, so as to feed a global population of one billion human beings in 1800 and 6.5 billion in 2002.”

But we should not neglect the fact, that success has its price and development needs his tributes. While gaining space in the economic and social space in each society, modern agriculture used more resources, more energy, affecting more the environment by appealing to new technologies. This is a vicious circle: if agriculture affects the environment, the nature will turn against it by destroying all of its performances. This situation motivated people to find the proper method to make these two elementary factors for many societies‘ life establishing a strong, stable, positive and continuous chain. “The idea and practice of sustainable agriculture has arisen in response to the problems of industrial agriculture. Sustainable agriculture integrates three main goals: environmental stewardship, farm profitability, and prosperous farming communities.”

One point key is underlined in each brief of agriculture’s history: the Green Revolution supported by a lot of researches, an infrastructural development, and a big investment of money, time and human resources in order to raise agriculture to the next level of development. We mentioned before that agriculture is correlated with any other aspect that controls each society, even the political one. “Agriculture has always been influenced by the actions of governments around the world. Never has this been more evident than during the first half of the 20th century, when two major wars profoundly disrupted food production. In response to the tumultuous economic climate, European countries implemented tariffs and other measures to protect local agriculture.” 

We know that “the European Union had the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbors, which culminated in the Second World when the European Coal and Steel Community begins in 1950 to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.” But when did it happen for agriculture to come on the first line of interest within the Union? “2012 marks the 50th anniversary of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), a cornerstone of European integration that has provided European citizens with five decades of secure food supply and a living countryside.” What did this mean for European countries? It definitely couldn’t be translated through regress, even if national agriculture may have been unlucky to meet throwback stages.

While in mathematics the most simple and valid equation sustain the fact that one plus one equals two, in agriculture the situation is different. One prospers state plus one under-developed state can hardly reach to zero, depending on the other variables involved. History tell us that the modern agriculture was born in Europe “as a direct outflow of the rising technical civilization and partly in conditioned response to the economic necessities or possibilities created by civilization and also because of the rhythm of demographic changes, especially of the population living by agriculture.” But when did the Union make available regulated rules and a specific and common legislation which has to become the Bible of each member state from the beginning of its cooperation inside the European Union in the process of integration? The key moment couldn’t be clearer for the agricultural sphere. “Six countries create the EEC (forerunner of the EU) in 1957. From its start in 1962, the CAP begins to restore Europe’s capacity to feed itself. Production control measures begin in the 1980s. The CAP refocuses on quality, safety and affordability of food and on becoming greener, fairer and more efficient. The EU’s role as the world’s biggest trader in farm goods gives it additional responsibilities.”

Theoretically, same legislative system should generate the same results but we should not forget that the Union, even if it acts as a single pawn on the international chess table, it gathers 28 different nations which cannot entirely burry its national specific. Even if CAP purpose is concerned at European level, its national application may differ from a member state to other. “Now, 50 years later, the EU has to address more challenges: food security, at the global level, food production will have to double in order to feed a world population of 9 billion people in 2050; climate change and sustainable management of natural resources; looking after the countryside across the EU and keeping the rural economy alive.” So, when you plant two different flowers in the same root, even if you treat them in the same manner during a week, you should not expect to obtain the same results. Each one has its own characteristic and its own accession process, much more speaking about two nations which may not have been started from the same evolution level, which has different natural resources, an internal culture and a totally distinct history.

CAP and its step by step evolution: are gates opening during the consolidation of European Union?

The EU’s common agricultural policy (CAP) is the main support of each member state and it is implemented as a partnership at the society level, with the purpose of gaining support from the European Union for farmers. This policy governs all the regulation and has specific objectives which should be respected for each of the 28th countries, to improve agricultural productivity, because people’s demand is increasing and to protect the EU farmers. This regulation has its foundation in The Treaty of Rome from 1957, when the first six states were gathered under the European Economic Community. History support the idea that the Common Agricultural Policy dates from 1962, five years later after the Treaty, with the aim of offering security for the food delivered and produced by farmers. Between 1970- 1980, the agriculture development reached a huge level when farmers started to provide more food than was needed and the policy aims to regulate the offer with the market demand. The next step refers to changing the support from prices to producers through direct payments for farmers, in 1992. Mid 2000s represent a huge performance, because Europe became the first world importer of agricultural products, which demonstrated the benefits of the Common Agriculture Policy. New challenges appeared on the scene, referring to climate change and rapid innovation and the regulation needs adjustment, straightening through employment and rural areas.

“Sicco Mansholt was a Dutch farmer and politician and principal architect of Europe’s farm policy. He piloted its key elements, based on guaranteed prices and shared funding among member countries, through marathon negotiations concluded by 1962. Far-sighted, Mansholt issued a wake-up call in 1968 warning of coming surpluses and of the need for swift action to modernize farming and raise efficiency.” To properly understand what evolution means thanks to this European Agricultural Agreement, we should remember how farmers used to act in this area of producing or assuring food, by milking cows by hand. The funds offer through CAP implementation to a national and European level, were the instrument necessary for making their work easier.

What happened with the Common Agriculture policy post 2013? It was adapted in order to still accomplish its purposes. It conserved its main rules, but changed in terms of previous statistics made to measure its impact on European member states and its benefic results. An important change refers to direct payments. “The introduction of a "Greening Payment" – where 30% of the available national envelope is linked to the provision of certain sustainable farming practices – means that a significant share of the subsidy will in future be linked to rewarding farmers for the provision of environmental public goods. All payments will still be subject to respecting certain environmental and other rules.”

In addition to that, another change of CAP refers to market management mechanisms having viewfinder the School Fruit Scheme and the School Milk Scheme raising the budget allocated. In the wine area, the High Level Group on Wine recommended a growth limited to 1% per year. “Moreover, new safeguard clauses are introduced for all sectors to enable the Commission to take emergency measures to respond to general market disturbances – such as the measures taken during the e-coli crisis in May-July 2011. These measures will be funded from a Crisis Reserve financed by annually reducing direct payments. Funds not used for crisis measures will be returned to farmers in the following year.”

As we previously presented, agricultural practice are dependent of the rural development. Farmers live at countryside because there are the fertile lands, there are their cultures of cereals, and animals are raised inside farms, so the villages has to reach a high level of development in order to outface the agricultural ingeneration. The goal of CAP post 2013 involves changing on a level with national allocation, co-funding rates, through innovation, knowledge promoted, farm modernization, cooperation, risk management toolkit, forestry, mountain areas and more important areas facing constraints. In addition to that, European regulations are orientated through agri-environment and climate payments, organic farmers, born of producer organizations and measures of encouraging small farmers and young people. “2014 figures for the EU confirm the growing importance and strengthened links with the US in agri-food trade.” (Annex 3).

On the other hand, Horizontal Regulation is an aspect which has to be adjusted in order to assure that the budget reserved for agriculture development is properly allocated inside member states. With this policy help, there are aspects such as control, farm advisory service, cross compliance, crisis reserve, transparency and monitoring and evaluation of the CAP which can fail if the rules are respected. “Annual export values increased by 1.6% and annual import values grew by 2.1%, affirming the EU's new status as the most important actor on agricultural world markets simultaneously as supplier and buyer. The largest absolute annual export value increases were registered for the product categories "infant food", "milk powders and whey" and "wheat", all of which already belonged to the European export flag ships in previous years.”

To sum up, the CAP gains its funds from two European authorities. “The European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) financing direct payments to farmers and measures regulating or supporting agricultural markets and The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) financing the EU's contribution to rural development programs.” (Annex 5). In conclusion, CAP is the most important act at European level, concerning agricultural space and works as a declaration of continuous need of adapting of changing and development, by respecting in the same time national and European regulation. Moreover, each step was made in order to open door after door through modernization and adaptation to the international space and we can definitely have trust in this European vow of evolution of European member states.

1.3 Instructions for unrevealing agricultural puzzle: European Legislation and Politics included in the CAP post 2013.

Agriculture has its flag unflinching fixed on the European Union map starting with the 20th Century. But not to be forgotten is the fact that agriculture cannot be practiced and develop without a proper rural environment. This is the reason why we should present the most important regulation included in European Legislation and Politics concerning rural development. This “second pillar” of the Common Agricultural Policy covers “three long-term strategic objectives for EU rural development policy in the 2014-2020 periods can be identified: fostering the competitiveness of agriculture, ensuring the sustainable management of natural resources, and climate action, and achieving a balanced territorial development of rural economies and communities including the creation and maintenance of employment.”

In present we have to deal with the issue of rural aging population, an exodus of young towards rural area and the decrees of those under age of 40 implied in this sector, so the new rules implemented in the European agenda, attentively target those issues. Keeping intact most of the last CAP regulation, the updates doesn’t refer either to the method in which the policy will be implemented, through RDP’s. Rural Development Programmes will have to be designed by the member state under six direction: “fostering knowledge transfer and innovation in agriculture, forestry and rural areas enhancing the viability / competitiveness of all types of agriculture, and promoting innovative farm technologies and sustainable forest management, promoting food chain organization, animal welfare and risk management in agriculture, restoring, preserving and enhancing ecosystems related to agriculture and forestry, promoting resource efficiency and supporting the shift toward a low-carbon and climate-resilient economy in the agriculture, food and forestry sectors, promoting social inclusion, poverty reduction and economic development in rural areas.”

The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) is the most important source of investment in rural developing among each percent of the national budget allocated for this area. The environment has to be protected and our resources have to be kept under quality and safety measurements since we are very concerned on the value of our food. And for this to be accomplished, an amount of money, time and human resource should be invested in benefic strategies dependent on each member state needs. But in general, these systems should take care overall of areas that can be used after reconsolidation, of under-privileged lands inside each country that can become very valuable, of young population which can positive and significantly can influence the development, of people which contribute to the environment protection and agricultural health and need funds. Moreover, in order to faster use the funds from EAFRD, “each Member State should prepare either a national rural development programme for its entire territory or a set of regional programmes or both a national programme and a set of regional programmes. Each programme should identify a strategy for meeting targets in relation to the Union priorities for rural development and a selection of measures”.

In addition to that, the Common Agricultural Policy is very concerned in the environment safety, and to protect it, will take measures that involve water, properly dealing with climate change and “biodiversity and the preservation and development of 'natural' farming and forestry systems, and traditional agricultural landscapes.” In addition to that, the framework for EU environment policy for the previous period 2002-2012, it is known as “The Sixth Community Environment Action Programme” set since 1990, regulated in the European Council. Starting from this political commitment, the CAP on the one hand supported an active agriculture without harmful consequences on the national heritage, and on the other hand invested in public goods and services which can protect or at least not affect the environment.

In order to provide good condition for practicing agriculture, the European Union touched each issue that may be encountered during any type of farmer activities. Important is that each state promote these rules properly and help people to better understand their importance, through training session. An important principal mention in the European Legislation regarding sustainability agriculture and environment is “the Polluter-Pays-Principle which states that the polluter should bear the costs of avoiding or remedying environmental damage. Generally, farmers have to ensure compliance with mandatory national and European environmental standards and respect the basic mandatory standards forming part of the cross-compliance regime at their own costs.” Secondly, people should be stimulated to involve themselves in the agricultural domain, because as we well know, there are a lot of humans who live at countryside and who have a lot of resources near them to bring on the agricultural market table. To this type of European actions refers “the Provider-gets-Principle, described as remunerating voluntary environmental commitments going beyond legal requirements and encouraging farmers to sign up for environmental commitments beyond the reference level of mandatory requirements. Agri-environment payments shall cover the costs incurred and income forgone as resulting from voluntary environmental commitments.”

After this revision among the Common Agricultural Policy and the Legislation acts within European member states, with the aim of supporting the best conditions for farmers, the safest and healthiest environment for practicing agriculture and the most profitable market by exploiting our natural resources, we can sum up by saying that the European Union is really visible in this sphere. And by visible, we mean involved with investments, a very solid and regulated set of rules and with a lot of initiative for improving the European agricultural situation.

Under the curtain of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development: contribution and implication in national and European development.

“The problem that needs to be solved in the years after the war is the low productivity 48 of the agricultural sector but in official debates this is not traced back to the holdings’ small sizes but a concept of the enemy is created in which still wealthy farmers are seen as public enemy’s exploiting the people for their own benefit and thus not leaving enough goods available.” This shows that despite its consistent and quality natural resources and its past famous in agricultural practices, Romania had to come to a political system heel which seemed to kill any chance to be active anymore in this area.

Under the Second World War, Romania’s situation was in route for the soviet model of industrialization and capitalism. “When it comes to the agrarian structure of the recent decades in Romania, the people’s refusal is not so much directed against the actual measures but against the political dimension of these state interventions creating an agricultural set-up according to the ideals of communism. This negative attitude towards political interference is not only important for the past but comes up again when looking at the present developments in agriculture.”

In 1930, only 40% of Romania’s GDP is generated in agriculture, falling to about 30% until 1960 and as a consequence of industrialization process adopted inside the country, the percentage goes down to under 20% in 1970 and 13.7% in 1980. Only in 1985 it reaches to 15.5%, due to some focused efforts for productivity. In the first year post-communism, Romania had to handle a difficult situation to recover its areas of activity such as agriculture, because nothing was sure anymore and nothing could guarantee that the transformation process will work for them. In 2001, ten years later, the situation visibly changed while the country’s GDP in agriculture raised to 14.5%.

After Romania adhered to the European Union, the light turned on again. Even if statistic show us there were non-productive years regarding the agriculture productivity, our country developed under the umbrella of EU legislation and under CAP policy. The main problem in present is that people should pay more attention to European opportunities offered and to be more involved in gathering knowledge. “A glance onto the trade balance with the European Union shows that imports from Romania increase by 183.3% between 1999 and 2006 while processed and unprocessed cereals hold the highest share. On the other hand, the European export to Romania increase by 282.3% in the same period of time, and here the focus is on meat as well as on processed and unprocessed vegetables.”

In this picture of recent events, the Common Agriculture Policy 2014- 2020 presents the fact that “the CAP will invest nearly EUR 20 billion1 in Romania's farming sector and rural areas. Key political priorities defined at EU level include: jobs, sustainability, modernization, innovation and quality. In parallel, Romania has flexibility to adapt both direct payments and rural development programs to its specific needs.” The main goals established refers to direct payments for farmers, giving a real chance to it resources potential and supporting development and jobs for people who live in rural areas. These measurements have to be taken and European legislation respected because it has the purpose to avoid crisis situation in agriculture such as for example in 2009 when the milk market failed. “However, there has been a re-appraisal of the social and economic value of small-scale family farming systems, both at national and EU levels. This will lead to increasing support from policymakers, and from the public, as consumers.”

Struggling between having national resources and properly exploiting them.

Are you not wondering why Romania succeeded over and over again to recover after being in distinct agricultural crisis? Is because the Union trusted our state, or because our salvation levers are not yet destroyed? Probably both of these reasons are involved in the process. We have already seen that European Union gives us continuous help in order to provide them good results and to contribute to the European Economy, and now we should have a look to our national patrimony regarding natural resources and how well we are learned to take advantage of them. First of all let’s understand “In Braila County in the south-east, 88% of land is arable, with some of the largest arable units in the EU, while only 9% is under permanent pasture and 6% forest. In Sibiu County in central Romania, less than 20% of land is arable, 50% permanent grassland and 30% forest.”

We have noticed that weather condition can become our enemies several times if we do not point out our technological equipment to combat it, but although, we happily manage to record high position inside the European Union on agriculture. “More than eight years after Romania joined the European Union (EU,) and over EUR 10 billion in EU funds later, the country’s agriculture sector has managed to register progress in many areas, including higher cultivated surfaces and overall crops production, statistics show. In fact, all agricultural sectors have posted growth – albeit many farmers and industry representatives argue that this is still well below potential – and new ones such as organic farming have emerged and are starting to gain ground.” “Romania has an unusually rich and well-balanced mix of natural resources. Hydrocarbons are found across two-thirds of the country, and the petroleum industry dates to the 19th century. Oil deposits are found in the flysch formations that run in a band along the outer rim of the Carpathians and through the Subcarpathians.” 

Even if we have a strong hydrological system and the potential came from rivers and lakes is huge, we do not use it as a whole, only part of it, because some economic and technical reasons. Romania is famous for its various reliefs, starting with large and opened depression to impressive mountains’ heights. But forests, which represent about one-fourth of our country length is composed by 800 meter of oaks, between 800 and 1400 meter beeches and conifers between 1400 and 1800 meters.

We always heard that we live in a country full of different type of resources which exploited in a proper manner with the best instruments, could conduct to a greater agriculture system and a strong economy. But what resources do we speak about? “Romania has an unusually rich and well-balanced mix of natural resources. Hydrocarbons are found across two-thirds of the country, and the petroleum industry dates to the 19th century. Romania had large reserves of natural gas, found mainly in Transylvania, where large deposits of methane gas and salt were first exploited for a chemical industry in the 1930s.” Beside that number of metals found in Romania is big. Southeastern and southwestern Transylvania, the Banat, and the Dobruja are known for iron deposits, while in northern Transylvania near the headwaters of the Bistrița River and in the Banat we enjoy the manganese. For example, another important area for chrome and nickel deposits is along the Danube, while on the other hand most of the minerals, sulphur, graphite, and mica are found in limited quantities. Slanic, Tirgu Ocna, and Ocna Mures, are famous for their salt.

But in this case, the lack of a solid representation and national help transforms our country is an unpolished rock. Here comes the role of EU Agriculture Legislation previously presented. So in this case, by becoming an European Union state member, Romania agriculture is improved and relieved by “the stimulation of trade exchanges as a consequence of the dropping up of the customer duties, the increase of agricultural products, and consequently on the farmers’ income, the access to a much bigger market of 450 million of inhabitants.” Where are we situated in the European space regarding restrictions, system’s consolidation are regulations in order to achieve the Union level for a developed society? (Annex 2). Our present Ministry of Agriculture, Achim Irimescu’s statement from June 2016 presents some disorders that should be taken care of: “Romania should pay more attention to the law regarding the farmland acquisitions and impose some requirements. Moreover, Romania has these objectives: the agglomeration of farmlands, nutritive safety and security. All these can be discussed and are in project of law within the ministry and we have to agree with the producers. In our country the price of a hectare of a farmland starts from EUR 2,000 and can reach EUR 18, 000, but within the EU states it is over EUR 30, 000.”

In addition to that, priorities for 2016 are declared to be already decided, based on the same Ministy of Agriculture’s pronouncements which are mainly according to 2015’s statistics and results: “In terms of financing, it should be a good year, as you know the amounts of money are higher every year. Last year direct payments stood at 1.59 billion Euros, whereas this year they amount to 1.7 billion Euros. On the other hand, we are already developing projects under the National Rural Development Program, and the first payment requests are now being processed for acceptance, to be later paid.” It is essential to take into consideration something we mentioned on the beginning of this thesis about how climate changes can become from friends, our worst enemies, but even in this case a strong agricultural system has to be prepared to pass over risks and external disadvantages. Year after year technology has to be adapted and improved in order to prevent and anticipate, to facilitate farmers work and to offer the best and proper methods for resources to be exploited. “Some of our producers have been affected by drought. Some 80,000 beneficiaries will receive compensations. The amount stands at some 66 million Euros. However, the cereal harvest in summer was good. Of course, as we all know when the harvest is very good at European level, prices decrease slightly, and maybe it wasn’t the best paid year, let’s say, for our producers.”

Our national structure is reliable, the Union is supposed to offer its economic levers for member states, and technology is in continuous changing and betterment, so what keeps us apart as state from touching the desirable maxim results in agricultural sphere? In 2013, experts on this subjects were presenting some of our week points as “lack of mechanization, lack of management in the countryside, the discrepancy between rural and urban areas, the job’s absence, reduced access to bank loans, decreased productivity- the Romanian food industry counts a productivity of 9086 Euro/individual, while the European average is 40875 Euro, being forced to import a lot- and the low level of organic agriculture.” In order to surpass these obstacles, we need some strong sub-politics, a strong strategy of accessing European funds, motivation and support for farmers and encouragement in young workforce. Moreover, a huge issue in our system is represented by the fact that “Fifty-five percent of rural residents are at risk of poverty or social exclusion (compared with 31 % in towns and suburbs, and 28 % in cities). Low incomes associated with semi-subsistence agriculture are the cause of the highest rate of in-work poverty in the European Union (20 %) and a concentration of monetary poverty in rural areas (71 %).” How agriculture interest groups take action in these directions?

Chapter II: European Agricultural Interest Groups

2.1 The concept of interest groups: following personal interest or running after achieving national development?

Each society encounters the need of being represented by a vibrant voice in order to promote its needs in the most appropriate and formal way to authorities that watch over different fields of interest. The main question raised when we speak about this type of society representative groups is if they have their own personal interest or if they are truly concerned about national needs and demands. What we know exactly is that interest groups have always had an important role in the decisional process, even if only one of influence, helping in the integration act. Specialized literature showed us that the researches weren’t able yet to find a set of characteristics for interest groups’ representation, because they are very distinct from one to another. One of the little aspects that interest groups have in common is they are composed as an organization, with more or less members focused on different legislative and politic affairs. Moreover, they spread information among society and contribute to the relation between state and its habitants, or between institutions and the Union.

“Neofunctionalists concluded after their researches that presumably interest groups would not only contribute to the deepening of European integration and the peaceful resolution of conflicts but also to an increase in economic welfare throughout EU.” On the other hand, in parallel with neofunctionalists, supranational institutionalists “maintained that interest groups did not have a great say in major policy decisions and that, in any case, they represent their interests only to their national governments who would act as the gatekeepers to the EU.” Always is important to know that the way in which you look to a glass you may see the full or the empty part of it. In this case, the situation is identical. Part of society believes that interest groups have a good influence and contribute to European democracy by defending national or part of communities interests, while others will not give them credit, considering they are only concerned in achieving personal goals. Psychologically speaking, if people who are judging interest groups it is possible to see all their attempts like being against their individual beliefs and against their own point of view, while those who “are speaking the same language” are more tempted to sustain these interest groups. For example, “based on their analysis of associational self-regulation in EU harmonization and standardization processes, Eichener and Voelzkow concluded that interest groups enhance the governability of the European Union. In contrast, rooted in a study of the organizational characteristics of some 50 EU level business interest groups, Greenwood and Webster suggest that these organizations are unable to act as governance partners of the EU institutions.”

As we said before, some concrete conclusions were not established yet. But only by taking into consideration many opinions, we can at least understand what coat the majority of interest groups wear. “Due to the institutional multi-level governance structure of the EU and to the weakness of the European parties, interest groups have easy and effective access to the EU institutions, particularly to the Commission, to put pressure on them and to influence legislation. Not only can they highlight their interests and try to satisfy them, but they provide the so-called “Eurocracy” with the necessary technical information to make and implement EU laws.”

To support the previous opinion, here are the statistics concerning the level of lobbying inside the Union, the implication of interest groups in promoting information and news of national concern in front of the most powerful authorities from Brussels. “There are approximately 15,000 lobbyists and 2,500 lobbying organizations in Brussels who aggressively lobby the dozens of major European Union (EU) institutions that controls tens of billions of Euros in funding as well decide the strict environmental, labor and financial rules that govern the 28 EU member countries. (…) 90% of industry associations, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) / interest groups, and regional representations are believed to work on behalf of industry, with civil society groups such as environmentalists and trade unions making up less than 10%. Together they spend an estimated 750 million Euros ($1 billion) a year to influence the European bureaucrats.”

If we take a closer look to the implication of interest organization in the European space, we will notice that Brussels has taken advantage from keeping in touch with interest groups. So we may consider this a win-win situation. While national interests are represented in the European capital, the Union gains the trust of its member states as a reward through these institutions. “Lobbying in the European Union has represented an important source of legitimacy because interests groups have given to the EU’s policies support for their implementation and have promoted the European integration among the Member States and the citizens. They have sponsored the increase in the EU competences to convince national governments to broaden the sphere of action of Brussels and have looked for support among their member associations.” But in order to have a valid and accurate process between representing institutions and European authorities, lobby has to present transparency. One trail of settling out trust among citizens was recorded in 1992 through the Treaty on the European Union, which putted on the scene two defining factors, the principle of subsidiarity and the Committee of the Regions. “The development of lobbying has been the result of two other aspects of the Community legislation: not only the EU Justice takes precedence over the Member States legislation, but 80% of Community law is made in Brussels”

Another impediment for choosing a part of defining interest groups without doubt is the big forms they can take depending on the nature of interest and on their organizational structure. For example, in the sense of their organization nature, Bowen considers that “the resource required by interest groups is influence on the policy-making process. In return for influence, the European institutions demand 5 certain access goods which are crucial for their functioning. There are three types of access goods: expert knowledge, information about the European encompassing interest and information about the domestic encompassing interest.”

In conclusion, we need a more detailed analysis of interest groups because the process of understanding is easier one by one. In this manner we can determine the level of transparency, viability and implication of each interest group. “Lobbying in the EU resulted to be necessary, and in some circumstances even vital, for the policy-making process as well as for the implementation of policies.”

2.2 The involvement of the main actors on the European scene of agricultural policy.

While we already understood agriculture is one of the main important sectors in each society with influences above economic, financial and political space, the interests are huge inside the European Union. Because of this, many interest organizations were born and started to be implied in each regulation process. Farmers couldn’t keep in touch with rules and changings one by one, they need to be represented by an authorized group which knows better all that happens and starts from Brussels regarding the interest domain. Moreover, the Union can’t supervise the conformation of each producer in part, so these interest groups can be seen as their “safety assurance” instrument. “The development of consultation between the Commission and the European interest groups and between the Ministries of Agriculture and the national groups has moreover reached the point where it might almost be called joint decision-making and joint management of the shared responsibility; and this may have reduced the autonomy and decision-making capacity of the Community institutions.”

“While being specialized mediators representing collective interests, agricultural associations have seen their role in society modified through the influence of Europe. They have become defendants of ‘public services’, i.e. their role as farmers in the global society has been transformed into a responsibility for agriculture as a public good.” The European Union functions as the heart in a body, being the exactly same process. A two way communication between European Institution and national ones is often established through lobbying activities. Each interest group represents “an organ” in front of “the heart” in order to create a strong bond and to assure a healthy and clear space for “the blood” – the informational flux- that feeds each system from inside the body. As people encounter problems when one of their systems is affected, the same happens with a state that has leaks in its politics or sub politics in an area of national interest.

EU policy-making can be analyzed on three distinct levels, “EU member state-level policies, EU level institutions and inter-state bargaining and the International level of analysis and trade issue. A variety of interest groups operate across all three levels. Those attempting to influence EU agricultural policy generally find it necessary to lobby at both the member states and EU levels. Farmers groups and other agricultural interests have historically had the strongest influence on EU agricultural policy-making.” Each interest group from the agricultural sphere promotes the idea that they are the farmers and agro-food organizations and they have a huge responsibility at Brussels to defend, support and make changes in order to satisfy all of their interests which are reasonable and plausible.

In this case, “lobbying is not necessarily to be seen as an individual endeavor, but rather as a collective enterprise including multiple interest groups lobbying at the same time to push a policy outcome towards their preferred position. No interest group is expected to dominate across all policy areas; the incentives to mobilize and the likelihood of winning on particular issues depend on how the cost and benefits of legislation are distributed.” The purpose of the European Institutions is to establish a common policy for each sphere of interest, from agriculture to health system, from IT to banking, etc. while group interests are usually responsible about the adoption in the national system of the legislation. What is interesting about European interest groups can be viewed while analyzing the US style of lobbying. “Unlike the US, most EU legislative proposals are adopted, which means that interest groups’ chances of completely killing a proposal are slim.”

Agriculture is essential in each state member because is the main source of feeding the population. But from many years, agriculture is not an isolated area anymore like when people were living to the country side and were directly responsible of assuring their food by cultivating and raising animals with personal purpose. Even then, from the oldest times, people were combining agriculture with trade. In a modern society, part of the European Union, agriculture is only one part of a huge system which influence and is influenced by any of the other sectors and cannot be analyzed separated. For example, in order to establish a common policy inside the European Union regarding food labeling, we come across some entrepreneurial politics that came in the view of authorities. “The food industry was opposed to the European Commission’s proposal to allow for national additional forms of expression as they argued it would lead to fragmentation of the internal market. MEPs’ rejection of color-coded food labels was seen as a major victory for the food industry who had lobbied hard to oppose such amendments.”

Studies on the European Common Agriculture Policy has shown us that “due to heterogeneous policy preferences across national farmers’ interest groups the final impact of farmers’ lobbying activities on policy output are only moderate, although still significant when compared to their common political influence. Finally, the lobbying system of the CAP is characterized by a high share of intermediate resource transfer among interest groups and politicians in total resource transfers.”

After many researches on this subject about the role of the European agricultural interest groups, we can definitely underline their main role, offering support at a national level to adopt the European legislation conforming to national interests and possibilities. It is impossible that the entire member states to apply the European policy in the same way. “The EU has established framework rules for national policies that aim at ensuring undistorted competition among its member countries within the common market and making sure that the EU’s international commitments, in particular those in the WTO, are respected. In particular, there is a whole set of rules regarding state aids granted by the MS, including for a long list of state aids in the agricultural sector.” First of all, the legislation will be applied in each member state based on each state aids, regarding production insurance, investments, disaster assistance, rules for young farmers and also for retirement, for meeting standards or advertising of agricultural products.

On the other hand, because the social environment is very different from state to state, because of national social rules and actions, social policies for farmers are also distinct inside each European member state. “This applies in particular to health insurance, accident insurance and pensions – policy domains on which significant expenditure is made in a number of MS.”

As we mentioned in this chapter from a personal point of view regarding the European Union System which is perceived as a human organism, each member state of the Union represent one of the body system, each one being influenced or affected by the others. Even if each one has is individual functions, a body cannot be healthy if the correspondence between them is not stable. “Even though a large part of agricultural policies in the EU is designed and pursued at the Union level, there are also national agricultural policies of the individual MS that have remained in purely national responsibility and which are financed exclusively by the respective Member State governments. However, the EU has established framework rules for national policies that aim at ensuring undistorted competition among its member countries within the common market and making sure that the EU’s international commitments, in particular those in the WTO, are respected.”

Interest groups, theoretically, should protect the national interests, should defend the national sub politics that controls the system and should assure the communication and informational process between states and European institutions. “The CAP is facing increasing pressure for reform form its trading partners, from specific business interests, from advocacy groups, and because of its unsustainable impact on the EU budget. First, there are the interests of the farmers, who have demonstrated their ability over the years to gain disproportionate representation in the policy-making process. Second, there is the increasingly adept manner in which food and beverage industry interests insert themselves into the policy-making process. Finally, there are the varying experiences of advocacy groups.”

In conclusion, “the renationalization of agricultural policy would imply the re-emergence of protectionism which could spill over into industrial trade and European integration generally. Anyway, the present agricultural policy cannot be said to be fully communitarian. The mechanism for dealing with fluctuating exchange rates has diluted the concept of a common Community price; and national expenditure on agricultural structures and social aid is still greater than Community expenditure.” The role of interest groups is essential to keep the national identity alive inside the European Union at a proper level in order to accept and act conform the European Common Agricultural Policy while adapting the prices, the regulations, the import and export laws etc. based on the level of development and other particular state aids.

2.3 Representation in Romania of those actors identified as active in the European space.

Romania, due to its huge economic issues and its dysfunctions in the political system, still remains a rich country in resources which by being properly exploited can raise the Romanian agriculture to the top positions in European Union. The duty of Romanian interest groups is to defend national sub-politics in agricultural sphere in order to keep the European legislation active and unaffected but changed in order to preserve our national goals. The involvement of Romanians in agriculture is visible, but is their attempt suited to the country representational needs? “Each of 41 counties in Romania has a County Center for Agricultural Consulting (OJCA), which is considered as Agricultural Chamber. The OJCAs are administratively and financially under the County Councils, but their technical backstopping and coordination is facilitated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. At local, village or commune level, there are total of 500 Local Centers for Agricultural Consulting (CLCAs), which are also considered as Agricultural Chambers.”

On the other hand, it is essential to mention in this thesis the creation of Modernizing Agricultural Knowledge & Information Systems (MAKIS), implemented by The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development National Sanitary-Veterinary and Food Safety Agency. “The project had three outcomes indicators: increased adoption of improved farm practices, marketing, post-harvest and food safety technologies leading to improved agricultural productivity and incomes compatible with EU standards; (ii) increased agricultural exports; and (iii) improved agricultural productivity.” Even if the project ended in 2013, there are still four Training and Information Centers (TIC) which are still functioning actively: the University of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences (USAMV), Bucharest, the University of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences (USAMV), Cluj-Napoca, the University of Agricultural Sciences (USA), Banat and the University of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences (USAMV), Iasi.

The general view of Romanian agricultural sector cannot neglect the important role of private companies in the development process. Due to the fact that usually, the private sphere encounter less barriers on the strength of its economic resources, in Romania agriculture influence its sub-politics and “input supply companies and consulting firms that give fee-based advice to the producers on management, legal and financial matters, and, on meeting with EU requirements for financing and available subsidy benefits for farm investment (50 percent financing by EU and 50 percent by a farm owner), under the EU’s Special Accession Program for Agriculture and Rural Development (SAPARD).” Among those private companies we can mention: RomActiv Business Consulting, S.R.L., Grupul Roman Pentru Investitii si Consultanta (RGIC), RomAir Consulting, AgroAdvice, Kemorad Group Ltd. (agricultural greenhouses business), Semplant Romhol, S.R.L (animal feed business), Albalact S.A (milk business), Semrom Muntenia (seed business). “A recent assessment of the current supply and demand for advisory services to the agricultural population in some regions in Romania (OSC, IRES, 2010), identified three major demanded advice areas such as (i) backing up the farmers to access EU Rural Development Program funds by identifying the issue, writing up the proposal and take care of the bureaucratic procedures of the application’s submission, (ii) technological crop production and livestock keeping advice (carried mostly by the input supply firms) and (iii) consultancy for juridical, cadaster issues, feasibility studies, marketing, management (farm and assets), training etc.”

Are these private companies, along with the public institutions which gather also the Non-governmental organizations to make Romanian farmers lives easier by reducing taxes, costs and by establishing valid and sustainable sub-politics in order to achieve the desirable result? “The strong position of the lobby, and agricultural lobbies, is primarily based on the unity and the unilateral nature of their interests, their excellent organization when promoting these interests, the existence of relatively small and homogenous groups, their ability to gain the sympathy of politicians, consumers and tax payers and, last but not least, their ability to emphasize the fact that agriculture plays an indispensible role in the society as well as at the national and supranational economy.” We know the role of the lobby in agriculture, but are those interest groups capable to register positive results at Brussels or they do not have the needed resource to do it?

Moving to the farmer based associations, cooperatives and societies, Water Users Associations, Farmers’ Association, Bologa, Romanian Spotted Breed Association, Panet, Farmers’ Association, Topolog, Bucovinian Farmers’ Association, Poultry and Animal Breeders Association, Rachitova, Romanian Goats Breeders Association (CAPRIROM), Wind Farm Association (RWEA), are some of them for which we cannot find many information regarding their activity because they are location-specific, offering support for their members.

2.4 Security, viability and sustainability of National and European Agriculture assured by interest groups.

Lobby can be a powerful weapon if interest groups know exactly their main purposes and if they are permanently connected to the Brussels’ environment. Moreover, economic resources are indeed essential for them in order to achieve positive results, beside the power and trust level in their abilities for changes. “MacLaren identifies four factors that, to a great extent, could explain the strong influence of the agricultural lobby: the solidarity of the agricultural organizations; the inter-institutional relationship between agricultural organizations and the ministry of agriculture, the importance government attaches to agriculture and the status of the ministry of agriculture in national government.” Only regarding the Romanian situation of agricultural interest groups, being realistic we will notice a leak of power unlike the European groups which are stronger, more popular and with a more powerful influence than our national ones.

In this case, what is the role of the CAP? Theoretical it should assure security, viability and sustainability for each member state of the European Union and should regulate the European system in order to correspond at the national level too. “The CAP fulfills three roles: a political one in that it unifies the EU Member States in their activities; an economic one in stabilizing internal agricultural markets and supporting sectorial revenues in agriculture and a redistribution one by means of the interstate budgetary flows, that are a consequence of the manner of revenue payments from agriculture and the nature of sharing the EU budgetary costs.”

But the situation presents a lot of leaks, mostly regarding the economic part, influenced also by the financial crisis that hit the entire Union at different levels. So the level of each country development is direct proportional also with the power of influence of their national interest groups. Romania for example “has two agricultures, without any relation between them and with divergent objectives and requesting different policies: subsistence agriculture –micro-farms which exist for self-consumption 2.6 million households in Romania own under 1 hectare of land and the agro-industrial agriculture – made up of farms with hundreds or rather thousands of hectares. 9600 households own over 100 hectares.” Is there Romania in this case prepared to play at the principal table along with the other European countries agricultural developed? Statistics shown us it is not because and here should interest groups interfere in order to consolidate the Romanian system to European legislation in the most suitable way to protect our agricultural sub-politics, to support young farmers, to obtain more European funds for projects implemented on our fertile rural land and to be the voice of the entire population engaged in agricultural activities, from small to the largest enterprises of agro products. “We definitely need a local vision for agriculture, which uses as starting point the reality of the two sectors – subsistence / agro-industry – and which ought to be integrated into CAP. Also, Romania must be an active participant in the debates regarding CAP reform and to seek allies for proposals that best serve the Romanian agricultural structure.”

Our situation at a national level is not singular. “The CAP burdens both the European tax payer, due to its high costs, and the consumer due to the overly high prices it creates. From the economic point of view, direct income support for farmers should be preferred over the current system, which deforms market prices.” And coming back to Romania, (Annex 1) to our farmers and to our proper environment to be exploited, “how is it possible that the largest rural population in Europe works the largest number of economically impractical farms – not even market connected? The answer lies in the social structure of the Romanian rural environment: in reality, subsistence agriculture hides the lack of opportunities, real unemployment and poverty. The greatest share of the production resulted from small farms is used for self-consumption and not for income.” Another step that was thought to be effective in our country was the born of The Short Food Supply Chain (SFSC), “an alternative food production, distribution and processing system built through the participation of small producers who are followers of extensive farming practices, as well as support organizations and consumers. SFSC is a bottom-up approach, coming as a collective solution to the shortcomings of the industrial food system”, which was rejected by the European Commission first of all.

Speaking about support, sustainability and security we should mention last but not least the existence of European Federation of Agricultural Workers ‘Unions (EFA), since 1958, concerned in present mostly on the integration of environmental considerations in agriculture policy, thinking the fact that eastern Europe could become a coalition between states in order to assure an open area for changing goods. “However, the actions of these alternatives, Eurowide farmers’ organizations continue to be most successful in policy fields and Directorates General other than agriculture. Eurowide alliances are usually more fragile than nationally based sectoral groups. Their success depends heavily on their choice of coalition partners and on the public opinion of the moment, which renders their overall position rather weak.” The hope is to identify the week points of interest groups at European level and then at the national level, in order to find the most appropriate measure for resolving these discrepancies in the agricultural system and to create a stronger bound between European legislation inside the union and between the member states. None of the organs can function without being charged with energy from the main generator which concentrates the biggest quantity of energy that can be transformed in amounts of quality for each state and after that transmitted in the right directions.

In conclusion, in present “markets are segmented along national and supranational lines, i.e. national (supranational) actors, interest groups and politicians, are mainly engaged in transfers with other national (supranational) actors. COPA/COCEGA is the most prominent brokers with a broker share of 97% followed by the Commission and the EP with an average broker share of 69%. Negative external effects of political control exchange imply counteractive lobbying, while positive external effects imply a free-rider problem among interest groups with similar policy preferences”

Chapter III: Case study. Interest Groups and their specific sub-politics

3.1.1 Brewers of Europe

As is very well understood from its name, Brewers of Europe is the organization which gathers and represent at Brussels national companies interested in producing and selling beer. Cooperating and supervising from the European tower 29 associations, Brewers of Europe declare to strongly promoting responsible values and encouraging a balanced life while consuming beer moderately.

Among its priorities we should mention: promoting the role of beer in society and how it can bring people together while also having a balanced lifestyle and encouraging brewers’ leadership to function by assuring the safety of food. In addition to that, Brewers of Europe tries to keep consumers informed about the nature and the effects of rational consumption of beer, but also about the risk of alcohol excess. In this second case, they are involved in partnerships and campaigns which are dealing with combating alcohol abuse and they are struggling with creating a strong and well regulated market of beer.

Secondly, regarding European and also national economies, the association supports the idea that beer production has a strong contribution to the wider economy and that EU decisional actors should put an effort to clear out distortions for companies and consumers on this market. Moreover they have a strong interest in encouraging competitiveness for leveling the playing of EU market. On the other hand, they foster good and improved technology which has not negative impact on the environment and which stays under EU Legislation umbrella.

While dealing with the financial crises, the beer industry has returned to a high level of development. In the EU report from December 2013, “The Economic Contribution of Beer” Demetrio Carceller, president of the Brewers of Europe underlined this accession. “With the numbers of breweries in Europe having increased to almost 4500, together we deliver total annual sales of around €111 billion, €51.5 billion in value-added and contribute €53 billion in tax to EU governments each year. Perhaps most impressively, beer is also responsible for 2 million European jobs.” For a better understanding of Brewers of Europe sub-politics, we should shortly present its other partnerships with cooperatives such as Euromalt, “which represents the interests of the malting industry conforming to EU and international levels”, Regioplan and Ernst&Young (EY), focused on presenting a clear and honest image of the economic impact of the brewing area.

Speaking about ethical sub-policies of advertising, the European Advertising Standards Alliance is concerned on good collaboration between self-regulatory organizations (SROs). “The general code of advertising practice of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is at the basis of each self-regulatory system. Its basic principles state that advertising should be legal, decent, honest and truthful as well as have due respect for the principles of social responsibility.”

On the other hand, Brewers of Europe are strongly committed in reducing the number of alcohol abuse cases and even if they are promoting beer production, in association with other cooperatives they have as one of the main purposes to offer people the meaning of moderate and responsible beer consumption. European Transport Safety Council, European Alcohol and Health Forum, European Foundation for Alcohol Research and last but not least Worldwide Brewing Alliance are one of its supported partners responsible for “funding or providing the very best applications to develop a better understanding of how the whole spectrum of the consumption of alcohol affects health and behavior in Europe.”

In addition to that, it is worthily to mention the implementation of the European Strategy in order to be taken into consideration in each country against alcohol misuse, launched in The European Parliament on 28 February 2012. “The European Beer Pledge” was adopted by each society in specific manners, but all of them covered the same three subjects: informing consumers and empower them about beer consumption, by using new media in order to be sure that information gets to its target, keeping the ethical level of advertising and marketing at a high percentage and confronting alcohol disease.

Being represented in most of the 29 countries by a national organization, Brewers of Europe has a strong reputation in proving the proper scene for regulating the beer market. In our country, Brewers of Romania has a history of ten years and the members who joined-up the specter under its guardianship are: Bergenbier SA, Heineken Romania, United Romanian Breweries Bereprod, Ursus Breweries and Martens. In the following sub-chapter we will try to explain this national association mission and goals.

3.1.2 Brewers of Romania

Part of the Brewers of Europe since 2008, our national association representing the beer industry in Romania was involved in social activities over the years. A pilot project addressing to all teenagers “Alcohol does not make you big” was born as far back as 2006, in Bucharest. Beside the previous example, we can mention the presence of information also in our language, about how alcohol affects human body, what beer is, health issues provoked by alcohol abuse on the platform: http://www.talkingalcohol.com/, initiated by SABMiller.

Concerning the security and control while driving, the Brewers of Romania launched another innovative campaign called “Pass the Wheel When You Drink”, authorized by the National Audiovisual Council. Having the same initiative, to promote the motto “drive safe” sustained by each association part of the Brewers of Europe, Ursus launched a communication platform in 2013. There were constantly published articles about responsible driving and about beer culture. Among partners of this project we should mention: Romanian Traffic Police, Napoca Rally Academy, Private Health Network, Kubis digital agency, Daniela Gheorghe psychologist, Barmania and Cult Market Research. The Brewers of Romania also discourage drinking alcohol during pregnancy and they started an awareness campaign “Find Your Balance” in the same year 2013, which appears to be very active concerning this type of involvement. Not only through online and televised media was the message spread, but also by creating events and seminars for future mothers.

Let’s abandon for a while this social sphere and move to another important aspect in Romanian society affected by the beer industry and by the association involved in this market. Statistics has shown the important role in national economy of this key sector. Our agriculture is very productive on this area and the benefit of development through producing beer is that 70% represents raw materials from Romania, while 90% represent local production. Moreover, is not to be unvalued that our country occupies the eighth position in Europe and that 4.5% of the total European beer production is assured by our manufacturers. In addition to this, the state budget receives a strong contribution from the Romanian beer production, 30% of European average and 60% inside the country.

We should not forget that the existence of this type of association, such as the Brewers of Romania is impossible without an ethic code imposed by national and European authorities. We have already seen how the European system of rules functions, so we have to summary how the national system works. The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development plays the main role in this story, being a strong ring in this chain. Also, national authorities such as the Committee of agriculture, forestry, food industry and related services within the Chamber of deputies, or The Ministry of Public Finance are involved in the performance process of the Brewers of Romania and are also affected by it. Regarding the communication area, we can feel the presence of the Romanian Advertising Council which is aware about each type of message transmitted by this non-profit organization.

In addition to that, the President Igor Tikhonov of Brewers of Romania’s statement confirms the fact that “2016 brings a different context for the beer market and I hope last year’s positive trend to be further sustained. Beer must continue to be the key element both in generating economic growth for Romania and in contributing to the pleasant moments we spent with the dear ones.” Concerning the fact that 2015 shown us that beer represents one of the main elements for Romania economy growth, more than 97% of the beer consumed inside the country, is locally produced, while 70% of the ingredients needed are also originated from here. Trying to create the most proper environment in the beer industry and to defend our intern companies national interests, “during over ten years of existence, the Brewers of Romania Association has imposed itself both locally and European level as a common voice of its members, succeeding to transmit to the business environment, the consumers and the public institutions the values equally governing them.”

How exactly did Brewers of Romania represent our state in front of the supreme judge? Some visibility elements are considered initiatives publicized among which we mention “Beer serves Romania. Romanians do honor to Europe”, which underlines even from the campaign’s name, that we contribute to the Union’s development. “Organized for the first time in 2014 in the Capital of Belgium, the event was set to pay homage to the Romanian community in Brussels and reaffirm the Romanian values inside the European Union, through beer. Part of the European industry, which translates into 2 million direct and indirect jobs for the European citizens, the Romanian beer sector successfully rises up to the highest quality and performance standards.” In order to support in particular our national beer sector sub-politics, most of the association’s opinion leaders established some goals to be achieved, for example Pierre Olivier Bergeron propose to regulate inside and also at the European level the following: “With such delicate times, now is not the time for governments to try and seek quick cash through new taxes on beer, jeopardizing any potential recovery and harming not just the beer sector but also the jobs, value and even the overall tax revenues generated by beer for the wider economy.”

Continuing with the media research and analyze we come across the intention publicly declared of Nini Săpunaru, President of the Committee of agriculture, forestry, food industry and related services within the Chamber of Deputies, which pointed out that “the 18 breweries operating on the Romanian market ensure a national production level that may be compared to the level of Western countries with tradition in the area, such as Belgium or Czech Republic, thus revealing the size of this industry. In this context, the beer industry will benefit from the constant support of the Committee of agriculture, forestry, food industry and related services of the Chamber of Deputies, so as to identify together solutions to the interest of consumers, companies and Romanian state.” Which are the results registered by Brewers of Romania lately, as we well know this agricultural sector represent a wheel for the economy, at both European and national level, a leaf in the jobs offering tree and a chain in the social sphere by bringing people together through socialization and communication consolidated relationships? Demetrio Carceller promotes the fact that “The Brewers of Europe ranked last year second as the best perceived European trade association in the field of consumer goods. Our commitment to equipping Europe’s consumers with ingredient and nutrition information has also helped to achieve this score.” May 2016 encountered another regulation regarding beer industry which obviously affects all involved member states in this area. “The European Commission has cleared under the EU Merger Regulation the proposed acquisition of SABMiller, the world's second largest brewer, by AB InBev, the world's largest brewer. Europeans buy around 125 billion euros of beer every year, so even a relatively small price increase could cause considerable harm to consumers. It was therefore very important to ensure that AB InBev's takeover of SABMiller did not reduce competition on European beer markets.”

To sum up, Brewers of Romania is one strong and professional represented interest group, involved in successive and continuous projects at Brussels, stating as the main goal representing its members in a adequately manner in order to achieve performance and the highest level of development among the beer industries. Our potential is properly exploited by this association, our society strong represented in the European Union capital, while Romania agriculture’s sub-politics are voiced in the way all of the agriculture industries should be, standing as prove the positive results.

3.2.1 CEEV – European Committee of Winery Companies

Can agriculture be seen as an entire process created by numerous factors and starting from the natural resources very important from the begging and ending with the result choose by people for personal consumption? Indeed we can and for that reason, natural resources are the main studded link which has to be taken into consideration. In this direction, CEEV consider that “Wine is a natural, agricultural product recognized by the EU Treaties and basically defined in the EU legislation as a product obtained exclusively from the total or partial alcoholic fermentation of fresh grapes, whether or not crushed, or of grape must”.”

“Europe is still the largest market for wine consumption as well as production and exports. Indeed, the world’s top three competitors are European: Italy, France and Spain with their centuries-long viticulture tradition continue to represent the point of reference for world wine-making.” (Annex 4) Statistics showed us that 2015 was a glorious years considering the performance in wine export over the entire world, not only at the European level. Jean-Marie Barillère, President of CEEV mentioned that: “21.9 million hectoliters (+3%) or the impressive equivalent of 2.9 billion bottles coupled to an economic performance of € 9.8 billion (+8.9%). This leads to a combined positive trade balance for the EU of over €7 billion.” Those are the most representative results for underlining the economic importance of wine production inside Europe and the need of having such a strong and consolidated interest group in order to sustain growth and to preserve a space for promoting and regulate the sub-politics of this sphere.

An important step was done by initiating the Wine PEF pilot, which is described as “shaping harmonized methodologies and consistent solutions for voluntary footprint measurement and communication of environmental performance of wines from a cradle–to-grave perspective, under the umbrella of the European Commission’s Product Environmental Footprint initiative (PEF).” Involved in the society welfare, CEEV sustain the representation of European program promoting responsibility and moderation in wine consumption, “Wine in Moderation. Art de Vivre”, a platform designated to show people the quantities permitted for a safe consumption of wine and the cases in which we are not allowed to drink it.

We should not forget wine production importance in the dimension of protecting and sustaining a safe environment. “Vines planted on hillsides help limit soil erosion and can also provide fire protection since the low density of their rootstocks helps restricting the spread of fire. Furthermore, based on the European Landscape Convention's provisions regarding the protection, management and planning of landscapes, numerous studies have been developed to highlight the value, to set codes of best practices, to preserve the environment and to promote vineyard landscapes as a label of quality tourism.”

To conclude we have to retake on the first line the importance of CEEV inside the European space for each state member, not only as being the representative organ of each wine producer or enterprise, but as the connection between economic growths, modernization of environment, supporting the human resource and developing at an international level also. To sum up, under the European set of rules, very clear legislated at Brussels, regarding the entire agricultural dimension and also the specific sphere of wine production, CEEV is a solid interest group which influences each wheel of the mechanism. Each European state highly involved in wine production can and should benefit from its objectives: “improving the market access conditions (tariff and non-tariff barriers) for the EU wine exports, preventing /removing discriminatory or disproportionate market access barriers for the EU wine exports and ensuring wines are among the EU top priority offensive interest in the definition and implementation of the EU Trade policy and tools.”

3.2.2 PNVV- Patronatul Național al Viei și Vinurilor

Our national association, the Romanian representative of European Committee of Winery Companies is focused on promoting and sustaining legitimate interests of manufacturers and wine producers from Romania, informing the authorities about experienced issues and supervising the legislative national system and sub-politics under the European authority and representation. Moreover, in order to established the most appropriate environment for all of the forty nine members but on the same time for the Romanian state, National Vine and Wine Employers is responsible for “maintaining contact information and common measures with states organs for increasing the efficiency of the fight against illegal production of wine or other drinks, ensuring and taking stand on cases of violation of the industry legislation and imposing the most proper actions for raising the general level of quality of the products and the consolidation of the internal market for products which may affect the health of consumers.”

In addition to that, the same association deals with promoting and representing its members through expositions, contests, symposiums and other actions and one of the most important things, “supporting the initiatives on the harmonization of the laws of the national wine with that of the European Union.” It is very important to emphasize the importance of this national association called Patronatul Național al Viei și Vinului, by analyzing our state’s strength and weaknesses also in relation with competitors, in order to see how its influence can contribute to an increase. “Among strengths researches pointed out: a high pedoclimatic potential favors vine cultivation throughout the country, areas planted with noble grape vines which already occupy large areas of land that determines the integration activity of grape production, processing, bottling and marketing it.” As in any other market, our national interest groups in this area should interfere in order to take advantages of this opportunities, while covering the disadvantages in order to support the development. Which are the internal regulations for which National Vine and Wine Employers are fighting for at Brussels? “On the other hand, visible weaknesses are represented by: most of the surface structure of hybrid varieties cultivated grape-vine (89 100 ha vineyard vines hybrid of the total 181 300 ha) which influence the quality of wine obtained, atomicity areas cultivated with hybrid varieties, high productivity gap, the average yields per ha of the country are at the middle values of the EU, reduced acreage, although it is a perennial crop, grape-vine was cleared in a fast rhythm.” “In Romania it is widely acknowledged by the principal actors in the wine industry that their national vineyard suffers greatly from the continued importance of hybrid varietals compared with noble ones. These actors sought but failed to have some of the cost of replacing the hybrids paid for by the EU within the framework of the accession agreement and/or the reform of the wine CMO.”

Following the legislative course of the analyze it is important to underline which are the institution with which National Vine and Wine Employers are connected to. First of all, inside the state, this association represents its members in front of The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, The National Sanitary Veterinary and Food Safety Authority, The National Authority for Consumer Protection, The National Customs Authority and The Foreign Trade Department. These listed institutions are responsible with internal regulations under the attentive watch of the European legislative system; therefore the national association has a huge representative responsibility of representing farmers, producers and manufacturers from Romania’s wine industry. The quality of the lobbying process assures its success. The lack of representation, state by its own opinion leaders, from inside the association appears in front of the Parliament, The Ministry of Finance, The Ministry of Labor, Family and Equal Opportunities ,The National Agency for Tourism and with The Permanent Commission of Romania to the EU. They know which are their issues and how to achieve more success and gain more authoritative trust, but how are they dealing with this national controversial environment?

On the European level, National Vine and Wine Employers meet malfunctions regarding its relations with EU Commission, The EU Council of Ministers and with the EU Parliament. First of these institution was responsible with the discussions regarding Romania’s integration on the agriculture sphere, treaty ended, with the limits of support on ANSVA control of non-animal products and also towards Vine and Wine Reform. “Beyond the exchange of information items, meetings socialized PNVV representatives into Europe decision-making process. When Romania entered the EU in 2007, PNVV entered into dialogue with high-level European civil servants, in particular to call for an increase in the financial envelope made available to Romania.”

What is interesting here and make us raising question about how interest groups are dealing with national interests or are preoccupied to fight against each other in order to get to their personal interests. PNVV, ONIV or APEV, the three actors managing our wine industry are supposed to represent our country at Brussels, to gain trust and influence with the purpose of later influencing the legislative system inside our state for gaining regulation that our companies can benefit from. But history has presented us some interest conflicts between our national representatives which can make the communication process with authorities from the European capital harder to maintain. For example, we dealt with “discussions centered on the status of non-distilled fermented still drinks (Băuturile Fermentate Liniștite nedistilat, more commonly referred to as BFL). The European arguments put forward by ONIV and APEV finally won out. This marked the first stage in the consolidation of area of confrontation between defenders of native varieties and promoters of international varieties.”

To sum up, we definitely need a system more consolidated as respects of common national interests at the European table. Conflicts of interests should be resolved inside the “house” and when going out for whaling our interest on the European forests, we should take our most prepared hunters in order to come back with the trophy. If Romania is struggling with national fights for influence and our Ministry is involved in balancing interests inside companies, we will not have the power and health to go abroad borders to defend and regulate European legislation in order to strengthen our sub-politics regarding wine industry.

Spirits Europe

The European representative of 31 national associations specialized on the agricultural industry, specifically on alcoholic drinks, Spirits Europe is the prove of the need of European interest groups which have the power to maintain under control legislation and laws concerning national issues. “Spirits EUROPE’s mission is to encourage the development of an environment in which producers and distributors can meet the expectations of individual customers and society at large, while competing effectively for sustained growth.”

Speaking about the messages transmitted to the public opinion, we encounter a very strong bond between the interest group and society, internal and external market, taxation and last but not least between Spirits, growth and corporate social responsibility. “The EU is the largest exporter of spirits in the world.  Spirits are the EU’s biggest agri-food exports.  In 2014, the value of exports was €9.6 billion. Spirit drinks are highly attractive to counterfeiters and fraudsters.  Be they Geographical Indications and/or trademarks, we fight to protect the legal rights attached to our products. Robust IP disciplines and enforcement are required.”

It could not have been neglected this association’s contribution to social responsibility translated through initiatives aimed on reducing the abusive alcohol consumption, related to alcohol and minors, drink-driving, responsible service/selling, consumer information, workplace and non-commercial alcohol. Gathering further information related to this type of initiatives, we can mention some examples of campaigns carried out in 2014 by its 8 member companies which has registered big success: the Latvian “Talk about alcohol” program in which around 1700 pupils have participated, the Italian “Know Alcohol” program which has involved more than 50 Auchan supermarkets and 100 Simply supermarkets, “Younger than 25? Let’s see your ID!” launched in Netherlands or the Spanish one “Drink Wise” by which more than 50 million people were reached through media coverage.

How does Spirits EUROPE place among the European legislation regarding ingredient listing and nutritional labeling for alcoholic beverages? Its declared position is of fully commitment to the EU strategy to support Member States in reducing alcohol related harm adopted in 2006, which since then has the same valid goals. First of all applied inside the association based on this program, are established the following objectives: “to address the adverse health and societal effects of alcohol misuse, to reduce injuries and deaths from alcohol-related road traffic accidents, to reduce alcohol-related harm among adults and to reduce the negative impact on the economy, to inform, educate and raise awareness on the impact of harmful and hazardous alcohol consumption.”

The importance of this interest group does not end here. Trade and taxation is a fundamental aspect that has to be regulated first of all at the Union level and then at a national level, taking into consideration the development stage of each country, it’s economy, it’s contribution to this industry and also it’s possibilities and interests. “European spirits success is based to a huge degree on tradition, know‐how and secret recipes handed down through generations. The existing 46 spirit categories like rum, whisky and vodka, as well as the 300+ geographical indications (GIs) registered in Europe are clear indications of a sector rooted in culture and tradition. It’s worth noting that, according to the European Commission, the spirits sector generates €21bn through VAT and excise and one million European jobs, as well as sales and growth that will stay local – these economic benefits being deeply and firmly rooted in Europe’s regions.” In this direction, we should mention that Spirits EUROPE is involved in reconsidering the process of trade facilitation, considering that this sector is affected by the latest talks at the World Trade Organization level and by the law adopted in 2014. “Possible exemptions in the form of special safeguard mechanisms and the possibility to classify spirit drinks as 'special products' would hardly improve market access for our industry.  Also of concern are floated proposals to convert all specific tariffs to their 'ad valorem' equivalents, which would penalize our high value premium products.  Another reason for concern is insufficient progress on additional safeguards for the protection of Geographical Indications.”

Spirits România – Romania association of manufacturers and importers of spirits

Acting as the Romania’s voice of alcohol industry, Spirits Romania is situated on the first line of national agriculture interest groups, very active and visible on media in order to achieve its goals. And by its goals we refer to the same list of priorities as Spirits Europe scratched out, by this time most of them being related to our internal environment. Also involved in CSR campaigns, with partners’ help, the association managed to lay the groundwork in 2015 for “Suntem mulți! Scoate-i alcoolul din cap” for preventing underage alcohol consumption. Another very creative initiative called “Cu cine alegi să faci cunoștinta în seara asta? Cu Poliția sau cu taximetristul”, was launched in 2012, in partnership with Romanian Police.

Jumping to the administrative and legislative part, we should remember that “the manufacturers and importers of alcoholic drinks in Romania pay one of the largest excise duties on ethyl alcohol in the European Union, especially after the increase by 40 % of the excise duty on ethyl alcohol in 2013. Moreover, companies specialized on this area are strongly affected by the black market, through limitation of development potential, workforce and investments because only 25% of the whole market value represents taxed consumption.” Is it possible that the intervention of this interest group named Spirits Romania in front of state and European authorities to soften the system imposed and break the barriers for creating an accurate environment for producers and manufacturers of alcoholic drinks? Due to its involvement, we are expecting “Over the forecast period, alcoholic drinks sales to be considerably impacted by the lowering of excise taxes. As a result, consumption is expected to rise, thus allowing manufacturers to lower their prices. Moreover, with the improvement of the alcoholic drinks market, consumers will become more sophisticated – a development which will allow for niche markets to be addressed.”

“Romanian legislation already contains a number of legislative provisions regarding selling, consuming, marketing and traffic. For example selling alcohol to and consumption of alcohol by people who have not reached the age of 18 years old is not allowed. Unfortunately in general these alcohol laws are poorly or not at all enforced in Romania.” For example, a solid initiative in this direction was born in order to prevent and reduce the number of accidents caused by alcohol consumption in our country at a local level. “Pitesti can function as an example for Romania regarding the development of local alcohol policy to prevent alcohol use among young people. Communities may not have the same alcohol related problems and habits, but there is a general approach or model to reduce drinking problems among young people Working with the local authorities is very important. Without political support a project cannot succeed.” So we have evidences that we are trying to move even at a local and regional level in order to adjust our national legislation, under the magnifying glass of the European Union, but how do we represent our interest regarding the regulatory process at their doors?

One important sub-policy adopted through collaboration with EU authorities and under its standards and worth mentioning is "Prevention of alcohol in the school population", under the implementation of an ongoing national program to prevent tobacco, alcohol and drugs  ‐  2009‐2012  ‐  approved by Government Decision no 1101/2008 . Its key points refers to: “control of production and sale, excise duty, minimum age of sale / consumption of alcoholic beverages, blood alcohol concentration while driving a vehicle (zero tolerance), prohibition to advertise alcoholic beverages (directly or indirectly) on radio and TV programs between the hours 06.00 – 22.00 and fees coming from: legal entities that made alcohol advertising, a 12% share of the value of these receipts and legal entities income from sales of beverages alcohol, a 2% share, after deducting excise duties and VAT. “ 

When this association was created by uniting producers and importers involved in the alcoholic drink Romanian industry under common interests of protecting national rights and interests, its president Florin Rădulescu stated that “We are proud and honored to gathered in the Spirits Romania’s framework the most important manufacturers and importers of spirituous beverages in Romania. We intend to play a crucial role in order to solving the industry’s issues and in particular to combating illegal commerce and production the illicit manufacture of spirit drinks, which are extremely dangerous to both economic and public health in Romania. Broadly, we want to defend the right of the sector to produce and distribute the good quality products on the Romanian market.” The success cannot be achieved in front of such a big authority as European Union, unless our voices use the most trustful and argumentative tone when presenting viable evidences of the needs of implementation or changes in the legislative system. In this regard, the vice-president of Spirits Romania corroborates the association purpose “of playing an important role in promoting the industry as well as tax contributor in the economic sector in Romania. We will be a dialog partner for the government organizations and non-governmental organizations, defending the right of the members to produce and sell alcoholic beverages in a responsible manner and in a legal environment. In this approach, we will use all the expertise which our European correspondents can deliver to us.”

To sum up, Spirits Romania is a visible represented association in all of the industry of alcoholic drinks sectors, involved in all type of programs and projects of adopting European laws regarding our national interests and rules. Another proper example would be “combating taxes evasion through production of spirits only in glass, much harder "illegally procured" compared to PET bottles. If evasion in the field would reach 20% of the market, excise tax to the budget would reach 340 mil. per year. This amount would add VAT of 81.6 mil Euro.”

3.4.1 FoodDrinkEurope – Food and Drinks Industry Confederation in UE

Markets all over the world are registering a huge increase of products while people change their needs in a fast way, so regulations need to be permanent and continuous revised inside each state in order to correspond to both European and national legislation. “FoodDrinkEurope's mission is to facilitate the development of an environment in which all European food and drink companies, whatever their size, can meet the needs of consumers and society, while competing effectively for sustainable growth. The organization promotes its members’ interests in areas such as food safety and science, nutrition and health, consumer trust and choice, competitiveness, and environmental sustainability.”

Focused on expertise, research and respecting legislation, the association tries to represent in the best way all of producers, manufacturers, importers or exporters from food and drink industry. FoodDrinkEurope is also a member of the Alliance for a Competitive European Industry, which has the main objective to promote competitiveness inside the European sphere. Regarding the first section promoted, food safety on each market is assured through a solid set of rules and procedures which include verifying food ingredients, food contact materials, process contaminants and allergens. In 2013, for example they launched the first Guidance on Food Allergen Management for Food Manufacturers. Another project to be mention in which they got involved during time is NU-AGE, “for healthy ageing which aims to develop new strategies, for instance studying how diet can prevent cognitive functions from declining with age, in order to extend the average life span for Europe’s increasingly ageing population.”

Moving to nutrition and health promoted by FoodDrinkEurope, we can identify measures on “encouraging balanced diets and healthy lifestyles, providing information to consumers and harmonizing nutrition and health claims, by supporting EU rules.” Moreover, committed to an environmental sustainability system, the association takes part to many legal activities and motions of reducing the level of gas emissions produced by the food and drink industry inside the European Union, while encouraging the increase of energy efficiency. “FoodDrinkEurope calls for a legislative framework to enable energy efficient technologies, such as cogeneration or combined heat and power (CHP) and welcomes the European Commission’s proposal for the Energy Efficiency Directive.” Food waste and biodiversity are also two of the main concerns in which the association tries to achieve the best results, being aware of the fact that agricultural practices has to be sustainable.

Long term objectives are also established for this interest group FoodDrinkEurope through FoodDrinkEurope’s Environmental Sustainability Vision for 2030, which show us reports about some priority areas and on which direction the industry should build efforts. For example, “in the area of sustainable sourcing, FoodDrinkEurope’s members: embed and promote sustainable sourcing in the supply chain and strive for a common understanding of the term with food chain partners and other stakeholders, make a positive contribution to food security and environmental sustainability both within and beyond Europe, identify and tackle environmental hotspots through continuous interaction and long-term contractual relationships with suppliers.”

3.4.2 Romalimenta

Gathering all companies from food and drink industry, Romalimenta has the main purpose to support their interests and to promote commercial and professional ethic among them working with state’s institutions. Moreover, the association is interested in breaking business barriers and in rising competitiveness on a national and also on international area, facilitating the communication process between producers and consumers. Among their main projects, we mention “Riscuri Zero” and “Si eu trăiesc sănătos”, where the first one “is centered on food operators in order to accomplish EU legislation in preventing professional risks, conforming L.319/2006, to assure employers and employees the needed resources for adopting risks prevention plans and politics for reducing the number of work related accidents and to promote “a prevention culture” through investigations, awareness, formation and information.”

Facing the problem of overcharging, “Romalimenta stated the fact that additional taxation of food is to the population’s detriment and will have negative economic and social results. Such a tax will lead to lower GDP and will have a negative impact on inflation and investment. Charging for food will cause market distortions. On this behalf, the association rejected the idea of a super-tax on food which is both judicious for food sector and for economy in general and for the population as a whole.” In this case either media is not the first support of promoting their interests and we cannot find many information or news about Romalimenta’s activities or initiatives at Brussels which support the implementation or adjustment of national sub-politics regarding this area of concern. Except for their website, not so rich in information, we are not able after a media analyze to find enough dates in order to place the Romania’s representatives of FoodDrinkEurope on the interest group’s podium.

COCERAL – Cereals Traders Committee

Cultivating and trading cereals is a very important agriculture’s sector. In order to regulate and to protect each cooperative sub-politics, association were born under the auspices of a climate changing process which use to make farmers’ work more difficult. In addition to that, as each city needs a mayor, each branch of the industry needs to be represented at the European level in order to achieve success and to be protected from legislative irregularities. “In particular, Coceral strives to: voice the key role of trade across the agricultural supply chain, formulate and present common positions to contribute to a constructive and workable regulatory framework within the EU, proactively monitor and guide EU policy making process in market, food safety and environmental matters impacting trade, promote strategies for the supply of safe food ingredients and feed raw materials to the benefit of EU downstream agricultural industries and consumers and to promote self-regulation and best practices via a risk based Code of Good Trading Practice (Coceral GTP).”

A solid example of how Coceral express and use its influence at Brussels stays the urge of implementation of the White Paper on Food Safety, from 2000. They supported including new feed legislation common inside the Union, with the purpose of eliminating disproportions between states national legislative systems, reviewing hygiene codes at all levels starting from farm production, respecting the Codex Alimentarius for contaminants and residues and simplifying trade procedures and securities. Referring to issues encountered in this specific area of agriculture at a European level, Coceral sustains the fact that “imports remain under threat caused by a possible unintentional and technically unavoidable presence of the traces of GM events that have not been authorized in the EU but have already been safety assessed and authorized in the exporting countries.” Because of this disorder, they became concerned and tried to modify the situation by speaking out loud at Brussels, considering that the Union’s management of GMos is too conservative in the import and export matter. In addition to that, “Coceral contributes regularly during the course of the negotiations highlighting the needs of the EU agricultural markets and how these can be addressed most effectively in the agreement. Today the most concerning issues affecting trade relations are non-tariff trade barriers, constituted mostly by sanitary and phytosanitary regulations, and more increasingly by sustainability  requirements.”

Being an important player on the European scene in terms of cereals production, followed by trade inside and also outside the Union, Romania needs a firm legislative scheme in order to offer and to receive desirable results. Based on statistics and researches “in MY 2016/17 production is forecast to boost by 12 percent to 21 million MT. Higher grain production will translate into higher local supplies available for export, which are estimated to grow in MY 2016/17 by 30 percent. Ministry of Agriculture is planning to propose legislation for establishing a credit fund that would ease farmers’ access to financial resources, especially applicants for EU funds, the fund being expected to become functional before the end of this year.” In conclusion, after deciding during national debates about the best strategies, Ministry of Agriculture is more willing to register positive results in front of European authorities if a knowledgeable and powerful voice, such as Coceral in this case, is raising the same proposals.

A.R.C.P.A– Asociația Română a Comercianților de Produse Agricole

Unfortunately, despite being our national representative of Coceral, A.R.C.P.A is an interest group very silent on the agricultural arena due to so many difficulties regarding suited legislation. For example, according to press release, we can find latest mentions from 2013 of this association’s representatives who stated they “encourage any agricultural strategy well thought out which is based on the free and open trade on efficient and transparent markets and which encourage further investment in research and education on agriculture. ARCPA considers that this combination is crucial for that agriculture to be profitable and therefore the farmers to invest in appropriate crops on fertile lands, in the corresponding quantities and with the proper technology.”

After one year, the media reported that the association organized an informational event, which had the purpose to present what the mechanism of agricultural product’s price forming is and the indicators that lead to those increases. Their statement described the situation of 2013 as follows: “the price of transport has grown considerably in relation to the same period of the last year and this because of two factors: one is targeting the excise duty on fuel and second is constant reduction of the availability of the fleet of specialized transport for cereals, reported to production volume. Rail is close to collapse. Wagons, rail loading points, scales and many others have disappeared while transport on the Danube is hampered by lowering the water level and the inability of loading barges at the forecast capacity.”

More information about the association’s involvement in projects or initiatives regarding European or even national legislation we did not find, because after our press analysis we understood that A.R.C.P.A is not one of the most visible and transparent interest groups in Romania. On this point, we are unable to measure the level of their influence at Brussels, as the representative of important actors on the Romania’s agriculture scene, supposed to promote the idea of free cereals trade and launching on our national market an effective and competitive environment for all participants, from importers to exporters and producers. To sum up, this interest group doesn’t have a transparent policy on media or a bound with it, which is one of the most important tools as an ONG which promotes national interests at Brussels.

3.6.1 COPA- COGECA

Copa, the voice of sixty organizations from the European Union countries gathers and represents general and specific interest of farmers all over the Union and also works in close relation with all the European institutions. Communicating directly or indirectly, depending on the issues with representatives from The European Commission, from the European Parliament, Council of Ministers and Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions, Copa has a strong influence on the international stage. “The objectives of COPA are: to examine any matters related to the development of the Common Agricultural Policy, to represent the interests of the agricultural sector as a whole, to seek solutions which are of common interest, and to maintain and develop relations with the Community authorities and with any other representative organizations or social partners established at European level.”

On the other hand, Cogeca is involved in establishing the most appropriate environment for cooperatives enterprises. The association “represents the general and specific interests of European agricultural, forestry, fisheries and agro-food co-operatives and to contribute to the development of cooperatives in general, influence decisions which affect agricultural cooperatives’ activities by lobbying the EU’s public institutions and other organizations at EU and international level, promotes the role of agricultural, forestry, fisheries and agro-food cooperatives.”

Preoccupied of agriculture development and interested in using the best and newest technology in order to support farmers and to make their job easier, Copa & Cogeca is involved in all type of events and meetings between European authorities and has a strong influence in the making-decision process. In this sense, for example, “Copa & Cogeca underlined the crucial role of using drones in agriculture as an additional agronomic tool that can help to enhance resource efficiency, productivity and profitability as well as ensure greater sustainability at a major Conference organized in the Netherlands on 1st May 2016.”

Another bold and wise move in order to fill gaps in the agricultural system, Copa & Cogeca, represented on this matter at Brussels this year, on 22 April, by Willemien Koning- Hoeve, Chairwoman of the Women’s Committee of Copa, asked for support for improving the status of women farmers. “Women represent slightly less than 50% of the total population in rural areas but in some EU countries the assisting spouses still don’t have social security protection nor are covered against accidents in the workplace. Women involved in farming want more access to education, vocational training and new skills to feel encourage to develop entrepreneurial initiatives and to enhance their competitiveness in agriculture.” And those two are only examples of how a solid interest group can fight for the vision and perspective of its members, in order to regulate the system and to contribute to rural and agricultural development. Initiatives or collaboration on European matters regarding specific groups, different categories of farmers or distinct areas enlarge its power and influence on the European stage.

3.6.2 PRO AGRO

The representative at a national level of the huge European association Copa & Cogeca is The National Federation PRO AGRO, constituted by 14 member associations and “including over 1,300 businesses and thousands of farmers who work at least 30% of the arable land in Romania.” Trying to follow the European vision while defending our Romanian sub-politics, the organization is focused on working on all of our society levels, politic, economic and social in order to achieve their objectives. Between those we can specify offering support to all of its members, improving and introducing new laws for special categories of farmers and not least, raising our country economic level through exploiting our best resources.

Due to the association’s president Alexandru Jurconi declarative opinion, “The PRO AGRO Mutual Fund (FMPA) will be the first agricultural mutual fund in Romania. It is not only the fund of those with money. It will compensate its members for economic losses caused by animal and/or plant diseases, environmental incidents or adverse climatic events. After the discussions between our European colleagues and Romanian farmers, I have concluded that we can take advantage of the previous experience of European countries which have already established mutual funds, and thus our road will be shorter.” 

As we can see after our media analyze, the National Federation Pro Agro didn’t touch yet a sufficient level of visibility in order to promote and to achieve success in becoming a real decision-making actor on the European scene. Accusing the political and social environment of their lack of representation and their lack of funds, the Romanian interest group is also concerned about issues of misunderstanding legislation by other interest groups from our country and of particular interest that comes on the state detriment. Which is the real problem encountered by PRO AGRO?

3.7.1 ECPA – European Association of Plant Protection Industry

As we mentioned from the beginning of this thesis, agriculture represents a complex topic in each society, linked with many other areas in order to respect all of the laws and common rules for creating the most proper environment for producers and consumers. In this particular case, we are dealing with a European interest group concerning protection issues. The manner in which ECPA shortly describes itself is :“we represent the crop protection industry in Europe; innovative and science-based, our solutions keep crops healthy and contribute to providing Europeans with a safe, affordable, healthy, and sustainable food supply. We promote modern farming practices and champion the use of crop protection technology important for the sustainable intensification of agriculture.”

From small farmers and growers, to big producer companies working in this agriculture sphere are defended and protected by ECPA due to its fight with the legislative system inside the Union. After a close glance, we can prevent huge disasters regarding cereals or plants of any type cultures because of pesticides which can affect more than imaginable. People encounter more and more needs nowadays, but they do not have to search each time they buy something, if it doesn’t have a negative impact on them the consumption. We are supposed to be protected by safety food rules both at a national and European level. “Besides the safety issues, it is usually the farmer that takes the biggest hit: counterfeit and illegal pesticides pose severe health risks to farmers who are applying them, can potentially damage/destroy the crop treated and thus ruin the farmer’s livelihood, leave unknown residues in food crops that place consumers at risk, create environmental risks to wildlife, water and soil, pose environmental waste problems in terms of disposal.” The role and stated mission of European Association of Plant Protection Industry is based on research of biological activities of molecules inside pesticides in order to protect and avoid infections, on manufacturing pesticides in order to protect both employees working in producers companies and environment and definitely on the same direction on transportation and storage techniques. Moreover, ECPA is also involved in packaging measures disposal of obsolete stock when the product expired or is superseded.

How is ECPA representing interest on the famous table of authorities? First of all, by sustaining the Integrated Pest Management, defined by The Food and Agriculture Organization as “the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or minimize risks to human health and the environment.” Moreover, many projects are launched or promoted by this European interest group for example the ECPA's Safe and Sustainable Use Initiative (SUI), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, actions supported by authorities in regulating counterfeit and illegal pesticides, The European Index for Sustainable Agricultural Productivity (INSPIA) project, or the Container Management Schemes. 

Evaluating transparency and visibility we register a maximum level, also due to its dependable relation with media but also because of ECPA’s participation to events and important meetings organized by European authorities in order to regulate the agriculture legislation. Each year seems to come for this already noticed organization as a chance to make changings, to become involved and interested on national and international topics in order to promote interests and visions about different concerns. This is one of the most heard voices at Brussels if we take into consideration how many times it managed to change legislative decisions or to sway points of view. To sum up, ECPA represents a strong shield against risks of many natures regarding pesticides and plant protection in general.

3.7.2 AIPROM- Asociația Industriei de Protecția Plantelor din România

Member of European Association of Plant Protection Industry since 2002, AIPROM promotes on a national level the responsible usage of products for plants’ protection. Its main goal is to assure that European legislation is respected and in strong collaboration with Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and with Interministerial Commission for Approval of Phytosanitary Products sub-politics are adopted when it is needed in order to protect both producers and consumers. Based on scientific evaluations of products’ risk level, AIPROM has the responsibility of checking pesticides and other wares due to 91/414/CE European law.

In addition to this, its visibility and transparency is provided by actions such as fully supporting of Integrated Management of Cultures through farmers’ assistance while the safety of environment is assured by AIPROM through a collection and incineration system of pesticide packaging waste. Moreover, the association is the interface of the legislative sector and farmers concerning the key issues from the plant protection area. But which are the specific actions taken by AIPROM in this direction? An innovative program started at the national level under the name “SCAPĂ de ambalaje!” in 2008, in correspondence with local associations such as Alchimex, Nufarm, Syngenta Agro, Bayer, etc. with the purpose of “collection, transport and recovery of packaging waste plastic, metal and paper from plant protection products (PPP), imported or manufactured inside our country. The services are free for both farmers and distributors during the two annual collecting campaigns organized in May- June and October- November. The rule is that packages taken have to be realized by companies that offers financial support to SCAPA.” In order to keep up with modernization processes and technology advancement, since 2012 was implemented the system “SCAPAmobil” of products’ rendition from home to the SCAPA truck.

Representing internally the ECPA’s objectives, AIPROM laid the groundwork of the SCUT project in Romania. “Based at a first level on an information and education campaign, the initiative comes across a check list: providing customized anti-counterfeiting training for distributors and farmers, providing expertise and training materials on anti-counterfeiting practices closely to parallel trade and repackaging, modifying legislation according to safety and protection measures and preventing and reducing illegal trade in counterfeit plant protection products.” Last but not least a program that should be mention in order to see AIPROM maximum involvement is SUI, implemented in Romania in 2010 with ECPA’s help. “Based on a well-designed strategy, the Safety Utilization Initiative of Plant Protection Products after a marketing research on national farms followed by closely observing on the field, ten messages became the campaign’s spine: read the labels before using, use only authorized plant protection products, store those only in specific areas, keep in good condition spraying equipment, etc.”

Due to the fact that AIPROM understood how important is the relation with media and how much it can help you with the lobbying process and all of your project’s implementation initiatives as a group interest, we are able to find information about each month events and meetings in which the association was involved. Most of the actions are targeting the legislative system, with the aim of regulating our sub-politics in order to both meet European standards and protect our national development regarding plant protection products through a safety and secure process. For example, since the beginning of 2016, AIPROM “started to run a project in collaboration with a private investigation company. The company generates monthly reports with incidents and suspicious PPPs and AIPROM will then share the info with the targeted members, leaving them the option to further investigate or stop the action.”

Transparent communication and organization of constant debates gathering all its members, the interest group AIPROM gained ECPA’s trust and its influence can be experienced at Brussels in a different manner. Regarding the legislative system, the association has the power to produce changes and to defend our national interests in order to make sure we are dealing with a safe environment and farmers, producers and distributors have the most appropriate work condition, while consumers receive the proper products, unaffected by some violations of plant protection products rules of existence.

FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation

Food industry is a very sensitive area because of its safety and secure need among both consumer and producers. People need qualitative products but first of all they need healthy and safe wares for consumption. Legislation plays the main role on assuring this and the European Union is responsible of regulating the standards in order to create a proper environment of manufacturing, packing, transporting and trading. Interest groups also represent bridges by which adequate communication is certified and through which violations are discovered and may be prevented or at least solved after the risk is already unleashed. “FEFAC is the only independent spokesman of the European Compound Feed Industry at the level of the European Institutions. FEFAC holds observer status in CODEX Alimentarius. Its main objectives refers to lobbying for a legislative framework and its implementation, without discrimination in EU Member States, safeguard conditions of free access to raw materials, the proper functioning of their markets and the definition of their quality and to encouraging the sustainable development of livestock production responding to the market requirements, so as to maximize market opportunities for EU compound feed companies.”

During FEFAC Annual General Meeting from 2015 debates were spinning around discussions about “securing the strategic raw material supplies for a competitive EU livestock sector, Securing the integrity of the feed chain and ending with a FEFAC workshop on strategic feed material supply – position of Central & South-Eastern European countries on EU GM crop import approval.” One year before, associations participating to this annual meeting were focused on “the European Dairy industry market outlook and opportunities on global and EU dairy markets – beyond dairy quotas, future cooperation between competent control authorities and private sector own check systems and on Horizon 2020 program objectives & opportunities for sustainable livestock production and animal nutrition / Role of EU Technology Platforms.”

As a visible and active interest group on the European chess board, FEFAC expressed in 2015 its vision among a delicate issue on feed safety management, by establishing the need of a “top-of-the-pyramid” approach considering the competition for resources, the climate changes conditions which influence the process a lot and an increased focus on waste reduction. On this purpose “FEFAC has developed an action plan based on three pillars: capacity building, optimization of risk management along the chain and cooperation between operators and control authorities.” Moreover, its implication consists in alliance with other agriculture interest groups in order to regulate a system with gaps at the European level. In 2015 “COCERAL, FEDIOL and FEFAC called upon the Plenary of the European Parliament to reject the Commission proposal allowing Member States to opt-out from the EU GM food and feed authorization system. One of the reasons cited were extra costs associated with the enforcement of the opting-out proposal by Member States, loss of competitiveness, no room for adaptation of the demand in case of reduction of supply and  negative repercussions on the supply chain from farm to manufacturing, putting serious pressure on jobs in rural areas”

To sum up European Feed Manufactures’ Federation demonstrates its involvement constantly, through proposal regarding different sensitive topics and by maintaining relations based on communication and negotiations not only with European authorities regarding Agriculture and Rural Development area but also with media and other considerable interest groups working inside the Union.

ANFNC

Asociatia Nationala a Fabricantilor de Nurtreturi Combinate was born recently, in 2013, under the optimist prediction of ANFNC president, Iosif Pazuric: ““the close cooperation between ANFNC and FEFAC will facilitate and support the efforts and investments of our feed companies to unlock the full potential of livestock agriculture in Romania. The current annual production of almost 2.5 mio. t of compound feed can be doubled within the next ten years.” Its goals predict finalizing the adherence process of members until the interest group will manage to represent 55-56% of the total produced in Romania. In addition to this, ANFNC works in close relation with state authorities such as MADR, The Consultative Council of ANSVSA, professional associations from farming and zootechnic domain and is trying to establish collaboration among OIPA organizations.

Even if it is a newborn Romanian representative of a European interest group on agriculture, we have found press information of significant importance about development and extension attempts of ANFNC. For example, in 2015, “a USSEC delegation visited Romanian feed and broiler companies and attended the annual conference of our association. Predictions took into consideration that currently, Romania ranks as the main feed producing country in the Southeastern Europe region, with an annual production of over 3 million tons of feed in the industrial sector. As the poultry, pork and aquaculture sectors continue to grow, there will be a greater need for a high quality protein source rich in essential amino acids that U.S. soybean farmers are ready to provide.”

Regarding this Romanian interest group ANFNC, we are still waiting to register results, to become more visible on the European stage due to its initiatives and legislative programs and also due to its promoting of FEFAC objectives adapted to our national context.

3.10.1 ESA – European Seed Association

Another visible and influenced interest group representing agricultural concerns in the Union capital is internationally known as European Seed Association. After a detailed research about it, we found out that after only sixteen years of activity many proposals were raised, a huge amount of programs were implemented under its operation while a lot of sub-politics were consolidated or new adopted inside our national system. Its main stated concern is represented by the fact that “the struggle for a sustainable and affordable food supply has not been won. Food demands are growing while supply is under increased pressure. There will be less land available for farming and more risks to agricultural production in the face of climate change. On top of that, demands on agriculture are increasingly varied: from food quality to a greener living environment and bio-based products.”

Taking responsibility of many crops such as cereals and pulses, forage crops and grasses, maize, oil and fibre crops, potatoes, sugar beet and vegetables and ornamentals, ESA regulates the European legislation among plant breeding and plant health, biodiversity, plant biotechnology and seed treatment and technologies. Moreover, “ESA as an association, as well as each of its members, is responsible for complying with anti-trust rules and for ensuring that its employees respect and are aware of their obligations under such antitrust rules. In order to further promote a business environment where the players manifest mutual respect and act according to the applicable rules, ESA has adopted a General Code of Conduct in 2012.”

The European Union and its regulatory institutions concerning agriculture legislation are not interest in meeting unstructured plans or proposals, unsubstantiated by spick and span strategies. In order to gather all interests under a check list and in order to maintain a discipline, because it is easier than getting in touch with each farmer, producer, or distributor from the agriculture sphere, an interest group has the purpose to present its members sketches in the most suitable manner. In this direction, European Seed Association assumes its role of a European cooperative in charge of meeting EU 2020 targets. “To meet the challenges of the coming years, the EU and Member States will require ambitious policies – policies that unlock the great potential of the European agri-food chain and maintain its place as a world leader; the challenges: providing food security, ensuring food safety, helping create jobs and growth, safeguarding the environment, improving today and tomorrow.” Moving to its Annual Meetings importance we should mention that last year was a success due to its high level of attendance, more than 920 participants, where the main policy priorities were discussed.

To conclude the analyze on ESA, we have to mention that this interest groups is also one of the most dynamic and involved in regulating and adapting legislation norms, in order to sustain its members interest in front of European Commission, Parliament and Councils. Keeping a solid bound with media, ESA enjoys more visibility than other interest groups and raises its level of trust in front of regulatory authorities.

3.10.2 AISR

Being launched recently, four years before, Alianta Industriei Semintelor din Romania is one of the ESA’s representatives in Romania. Among its main objectives, our national interest groups mentioned “a strong desire of agricultural development support of certified seed industry in our country, promoting rights concerning intellectual property in Romania by recognizing specific patents and seed varieties registered under Community law and implementation of informative campaigns for general public and mass media.” Under the auspices of OECD SEED SCHEMES adopted in 2016, AISR spin its activity among ten big companies from Romania, representing a 70% of domestic market share, in order to raise the qualitative level with the purpose of valuing production at higher prices, as its president set as mission.

The national interest group is very visible on mass media due to its constant participation to events where seed industry concerns are presented and debated in order to find proper solutions. From the beginning of the year we registered its participation at the Syngenta Summit, Business Press Agricol Gala, The 7th forum "Optitech for fruit-grower" organized by Syngenta, CCIFFER –Agricultural Risks Management, National Conference LAPAR 2016, Day of wheat and barley at INCDA Fundulea and many others.

Due to its president Antonia Ivascu statement, “ASR will continue working and lobbying for this area of interest, hoping to gain more support on future and having more decision-making groups on its side. Moreover, inside ASR was often discussed the importance of plant breeding sector according to productivity, biodiversity, health and quality of agriculture, horticulture, feed production and environment protection, but mostly about certified seeds utilization by farmers.” In addition to that, press articles stays at evidence of the fact that the apolitical, independent and nongovernmental association ASR gained in four years the farmers’ trust, other agriculture interest groups’ support and also visibility and influence in front of national authorities such as Agriculture and Rural Development Ministry, Environment Ministry, National Phytosanitary Agency and many others. “Among sub-politics promoted and defended by this interest groups we need to mention the support of seeds treatment technologies with neonicotinoids in Romania, the need of adoption some technical solutions regarding accidental presence of genetically modified material in conventional food and seeds and also the regulation of exports in non-EU countries, etc.”

As we have seen, Alianta Industriei Semintelor din Romania has a huge development potential due to its rapid evolution and growth inside the industry, to its permanent implication on the European treats regarding agriculture measurements and also to its maximum level of professionalism in activities and its transparency and constant collaboration with mass media.

3.10.3 AMSEM

The second representative of ESA in Romania is called Asociatia Amelioratorilor, Producatorilor si Comerciantilor de Samanta si Material Saditor din Romania, “representing the groups interest focused on introducing genetic progress through breeding, support to ensuring production and quality of seeds and planting material, major agricultural and horticultural crops, developing the internal market, intellectual income’s protection, balancing prices both for members and for its farmers, participation in drafting Romanian and European legislation regarding seed industry and boosting international trades with seeds and seedlings.”

Searching on its website, we will found information about its intervention in the regulatory system. The association is also responsible with the research sphere on seed industry and presents constantly discrepancies between European and Romanian legislation, how our sub-politics should be better represented, and regulations on different crops according to each one development level. In addition to that, the presence in mass media is assured also by the existence of the AMSEM monthly newspaper in which are presented the most important statistics, changes and dates about this area in general and also about the association in particular. In order to encourage active participation of interested societies or people involved in agricultural activities, AMSEM offers the possibility of contributing with materials for the newspaper. To sum up, the association has its pylons strong anchored in the seed industry regulation system and it is involved in many types of activities concerning legislative issues which need to be voiced at Brussels.

Conclusions

Is National Agriculture the escape ladder of our country? Starting our conclusions based on researches from this question’s substrate, we have to sum up all information gathered among this thesis. Being an industry situated under a continuous changing process, European politics on one hand and national sub-politics on the other hand, have to keep up with each social, political or economic environment transformation. Our purpose was not to establish if we should become more independent as member states or to achieve more European standards. Our goal was to emphasize how an interest group can influence the capital and how can a wheel change the entire system of a mechanism.

Our research showed us that European interest groups reuniting all its national representatives are more powerful at Brussels because of many factors. First of all, they function as more solid authorities on the negotiation table, they are closer as geographical, theoretical and ideological approach to the center of the Union and moreover they use to have the funds needed in order to become active in the representation initiatives. We have teams of experts at Brussels who are pulling the strings for gaining responsibilities by permanently studying the market and all type of changes occurrence, of constantly promoting new regulation established inside the interest groups and of defending its member’s visions and that eases the prerogatives of each link of the circle. But are interest groups the strongest and safest tool for achieving the desirable results? History and lately results shown us that lobbying is one of the most functional and efficient measure used in order to change authorities opinion and attitudes towards sub-politics implemented. And European associations such as Brewers of Europe, CNVV, European Seed Association and any other of previous presented groups demonstrated us how much power they have in the regulatory process. Actually, they are the interface between national companies and groups and the authorities from Brussels. We can compare the system with Matryoshka dolls. Farmers are gathered in local congregation and affiliated with producers and manufacturers from their sector of agriculture industry who are further represented by national or sectorial interest groups. The next representatives come with more influence power and decisional-making power in front of national Ministries or Councils. Forwards, to ensure a transparent and efficient communication between member states and between a state and the Union organs, European associations come to satisfy the promotion of rights and interests and representation needs.

In addition to that, we have seen that some of the interest groups studied in our paper encounter some barriers in accessing enough European funds, and they are still trying to gain support and affiliation with other cooperatives in order to enlarge their sphere of activity and in order to obtain more decisional influence. Participation to European events, investing in research and development, maintaining a strong bound with mass media are only some of their tools in order to reach the proposed goals. Moreover both European and national climate permit the development of those interest groups which are needed in order to supervise the system and to adapt and keep people informed about new opportunities or new threats. Organizations such as Berarii României, Patronatul Național al Viei și Vinului, or Spirits România have an essential role in protecting and regulating the system, by being also involved in corporate social responsibilities actions without which, none of our national producing companies would exist.

To sum up, we live in a circle of dependencies. European Union needs its member in order to function, so it has the responsibility of assuring the best circumstances and laws for each state. On the other hand, history has shown us that European states were helped in their development process by the discipline and conformity imposed by the Union. Agricultural industry is the best example, having as feeder the Common Agriculture Policy, which is true that has been regulated pursuant to each society. And for this process to be accomplished, we encountered a tremendous need of being represented by specific experts working under the system of interest groups. The major problem is to offer them help in order to become larger and to expend their direction in each of the industry sector through cooperation and transparent communication actions.

Annexes

Annex 1

Romania

Agriculture: Economic Accounts

Source: Eurostat, Economic Accounts for Agriculture (values at constant producer prices). Updated: March 2016

Annex 2

Romania

Agricultural trade

Source: Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development, based on COM EXT data. Updated: January 2016

Annex 3

The path of CAP expenditure by calendar year (in current prices)

Source: DG Agriculture and Rural Development

Chart 2 shows CAP actual payments from 1990- 2012, commitments for 2013 and the new MFF ceiling from 2014- 2020.

Annex 4

Total Wine Must Production evolution – GERMANY, ROMANIA, PORTUGAL, HUNGARY, GREECE, AUSTRIA & BULGARIA Situation March 2016

Source: European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, C.2. Wine, spirits, horticultural products, specialized crops available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/wine/statistics/harvest-forecast-2015-2016_en.pdf

Annex 5

Breakdown of Union support for rural development (2014 to 2020)

(Current prices in EUR)

Source: European Commission, Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 and the financing of the CAP, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-funding/budget/mff-2014-2020/mff-figures-and-cap_en.pdf.

Annex 6

1st Interview – ASIR – Seeds Industry Alliance from Romania

Executive Director Antonia Ivașcu

1. How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of Romanian institutions?

We are trying to maintain an adequate cooperation and professional communication with our national authorities such as Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the other national interest groups from different agricultural areas than our in order to support the farmers, producers and also customers better. Moreover we are dealing directly with farmers or cooperatives that have to be taken into consideration into the process because they represent the first pylon on the regulatory system.

2.  How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of European institutions?

Social, economic and political environment being in continuous changing, interest groups are the entities that can assure a relevant and valid dissemination of information towards its members at a national level, being on the same time the best representational scheme of those groups’ interest at a European level for sub-politics regulation. ASIR is member of ESA (European Seed Association) and use to participate to work groups and actions initiated by the European association.

3. Which are the most common issuse encountered as an agriculture interest group ?

The lack of Romanian authorities’ involvement and weak information of Romanian Euro- Parliamentarians is one of the main issues. European legislation doesn’t especially favor state interests regarding the agricultural sphere. Romania was not properly prepared for the pre-accession period for this area and it is permanently behind all of the other member states. The European legislation implementation is mandatory at all member states’ level; it is accomplished, but usually difficulty. Moreover, we don’t consider that even our own state supports rural development in particular. An additional problem is also the relation established with farmers, who has to be very well informed about any news from seeds’ area.

4.  Which are the most important projects that you wish to implement during 2016- 2020 period?

We will focus on defending rights concerning intellectual property specific on Romania’s territory through patents recognition and seeds varieties registered due to community legislation and also fighting against seed’s counterfeiting increasingly appeared on the market.

5.  Through which methods do you consider the organization you are representing can gain visibility on the European scene ?

Attending work groups and conferences, publishing articles and cooperating in seminars organization is one of the main ideas to become more visible. Moreover, through LinkedIn utilization, consolidation of our website and also through responding to international questioners regarding Romanian agriculture situation, our organization can gain public trust and interest in our activities.

2nd Interview – National Federation Pro Agro

General Director Florentin Bercu

1. How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of Romanian institutions?

National Federation PRO AGRO is a profesional organization founded in 2011 by and for romanian producers from the agricultural area, food industry and conexes services, with the purpose of promoting, representing, supporting and defending representative proffesional organizations members’ interest in relation with european institutions and national private or public ones.

PRO AGRO develops for the fifteen members organizations the following activities:

a) undertaking necesary steps for affiliation to european professional organizations, with the goal of participating in elaborating and implementing CAP and for affiliation to other international organizations of interest for Federation.

b) taking over from members opinions, political proposals, comments about european politics and their implementation in Romanian agriculture, prepares supporting documents which are substantiated, subbmited and sustained in front of european organs.

c) synthesising documents and european programs from agriculture area and transmits to members for analyzes and opinion formulations.

d) lobbying through any means, for chance equality of every european producers, and for eliminating discrimination among European agri-politics

e) acomplishing agreements with similar organizations from european countries for mutual support among CAP development proposals .

f) colaborating and making deals with proffesional organizations from other countries for technological information, experience changes and for indentifying favorable markets for romanian producers.

g) being continuous concerned about its structures consolidation and development, about improving relations and cooperation with its members and about assuring a proper environment for relations between members and also mediates any missunderstandings between them.

h) promoting and sustaining legislative system adoption by public national and european authorities from activity and interest Federation’s areas.

i) participating among other members directly involved in this area, on institutionalized social debate from resort Ministry but also from other Ministries or central public or european institutions.

j) militating for a proper relation with intern and international mass-media.

k) taking part with the other members involved in this area to negociation about original colective work employment

l) being able to fund under its subordonation and to administrate foundations and companies in its members’ interest.

m) developing fundraising activities on its memebers’ interest and also on developing its own programes and investments interests

n) working on sustainable development of agricultural production through supporting producers to highlight human and material resources from the rural spaces in order to raise the farmers and professional associations economical power

Under its members’ solicitations and on the executive secretary notification Pro Agro was responsible of creating more than 580 addresses, pozitions and points of view through which highlights legislative issues from romanian agri-food area in relation with presidency, Parliament, Romanian Government and resort Ministries, through institutional debates. Due to its membership to Employers Confederation UPR BUSINESSROMANIA takes part to social dialog meetings.

2.  How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of European institutions?

Through affiliation with Copa Cogeca Romanian farmers get the chance to express their points of view which will have a big impact among their incomes. This represent a huge advantage, both for us as organization and for Romania also. PRO AGRO has at the level of COPA –COGECA twelve votes, the same situation as profesional organizations from France, Italy, Spain, Poland, UK and it is prezent through eleven civil debate groups and twenty-three work and advisory groups with fifty- eight experts.

Due to its membership to COPA-COGECA, as full rights members, organizations, submembers and romanians have the following advantages :

– fast Access to news, work groups, promotion campaigns, corespondance with european officials, positions, addresses, press release, reports, seminars and events.

–  examining issuse concerning CAP development.

– representing overall agriculture area’s interests.

– searching for common interest solutions, maintaining and developing relations with community authorities and with other representative organizations or social partners established at European level.

– discussing issuse about different agricultural production sectors or about areas and proposing solutions to raised questions among the representatives of European member organizations.

– coordonating activities at global level of the area, about agriculture, politics and agricultural politics in general.

– having equal representation chances for all sectors and area together.

– taking part to strategies and politics’ elaboration concerning sustainable development of agriculture.

– taking part to harmonizing agricultural legislation in agreement with European common market organization and participating to agri-food national and comunities politics implementation.

– promoting loyal competitiveness among players from the market.

3. Which are the most common issuse encountered as an agriculture interest group ?

1. The lack of certain information about production and consumption for each UAT in order to see what is profitable to produce, where and for founding a long term strategy respected by all politics formations

2. The lack of a specific legislation for obtaining the reprezentativeness of proffesional organizations sector (similar to 62/2011 law, but acording to member’s lands, number of animals, etc) and priority cooperation between state institutions and the specific organizations.

3. Institutional dialogue mimicked by state authorities. Lipsa de corelare intre institutiile statului in crearea cadrului legislativ.

4. Lack of responsability among national interes of most of the politicians. Not encouraging proffesionals, honest, involved, vigilants, perseverent people with results.

5. The absence of a Romanian Promotion Agri-food Products Agency, the introduction of a measurement regarding quality and promoting inside P.N.D.R. 2014 – 2020 acording to priority 3A Art.16 Reg. (CE) 1305/2013 F.E.A.D.R.

6. Politician’s fear of having independent and solid agricol chambers. They preffer a compromise situation which they can control acording to their own interests.

7. Not encouraging proffesional associations to develop, a stimulus being registred through their implication in techincal assistance programs of European programs. (following the European model)

8. The lack of reaction to solicitations of emergency modification of nr. 149/2015 law concerning modification and completion of Hunting Law and of protecting fund nr. 407/2006 because of abuses which are produced and violations of property right.

9. Denying clearing debts to the state budget with distinct type of payments. It is not intended to provide Romanian farmers the possibility of offsetting returnable fund from the state budget coming from T.V.A., with other payments they will have to make towards it.

4.  Which are the most important projects that you wish to implement during 2016- 2020 period?

Building a coagulated team coagulated within the Executive Secretariat of the Federation by continuously improving individual and group performance to cope with issues and challenges raised by member organizations or its own initiative.

Improving legislation on the inter-branch organizations and reactivate their product.

Involvement in creating and implementing the legislative framework to eliminate unfair commercial practices of large chain stores and balancing bargaining bounds relationship with manufacturers.

Strengthening relations among the member organizations of the Federation by creating a common platform for institutional dialogue, to expand or strengthen their representativeness area.

Solving specific problems, joint and individual members, of which we recall:

simplifying the overall procedures for accessing European funds

completion and commissioning emergency enforcement certificates of deposit

complete tabulation cadastre and land to their merging, until 2018

removing the ban on neonicotinoid seed treatment

excise duty diesel for agriculture

initiate steps for allowing cultivation of transgenic plants

modification of nr. 566/2004 Law, agricultural cooperatives law and streamline the development of agricultural cooperatives in Romania by providing facilities to encourage production planning to collect, centralize storage, processing, packaging, distribution and sale in an organized manner

defining 6 a S.M. 4.3. Anexes from P.N.D.R. 2014-2020

setting priorities for the main irrigation infrastructure investments where investments were made in the secondary irrigation infrastructure to cope with the volume of water that exceed what can be provided

strengthening functional relationships between O.I.P.A. and M.A.D.R. by reorganizing M.A.D.R. in terms of departments, and the conversion of a functional structure of a sufficient number of personnel

remediating legislation on recycling of products used in food industry by ensuring the transfer of responsibility takeover in particular

enhancing prevention and control measures related to the development PPA (African Swine Fever) in the NE states bordering Romania and operational measures to dismantle unauthorized fairs that are held in December

the need to speed up the adoption of measures to prevent and combat tax evasion at the crossings of the border, in terms of pork, and structuring measures to protect small farmers against the tendency to monopolize the market by major manufacturers from other countries the EU, through measures and unfair practices

gaining M.A.D.R. support in the C.E. and D. G. AGRI for removal from the list of bluetongue disease in O.I.E. notifiabile and to amend Decision 764/2013 by removing Romania from Annex-decision prohibiting the movement of live pigs from Romania to other Member States of U.E

giving young females bovine minimis

resolving the lack of strategies to protect farmers against price fluctuations purchase of milk as raw material

covering the lack of a strategy to identify new markets for the sale of live animals and meat products and milk, which could represent an alternative to the income from the sale of milk

covering the lack of a strategy to streamline the work of dairy farmers breeders in Romania needed sustainable development of the sector, but also in inter-European competition with other farmers

no record systems that reflects the reality of animal movement as S.N.I.A. malfunctioning and simplify the cancellation of the registration for certain incidents beyond the control of the farmer

enormous price difference from producer – processor – shelf

troubleshooting rendering

manure management, waste and sludge from work in the livestock farms

labeling without misleading consumers

the new law of biomass and biogas

new regulations for energy crops

Enhancing collaboration between all major professional organizations in the field.

Improving and strengthening Romanian professional organizations images in the minds of producers from agriculture and food industry, educational institutions and the country's future farmers, their families and rural residents.

To promote draft legislation under which to pay official representativeness of professional organizations based on surfaces or livestock owned by its members for consultation, mostly to organizations that meet the criteria of representativeness.

Initiate and maintain relations of cooperation both with the academic and university research institutes and business area.

5.  Through which methods do you consider the organization you are representing can gain visibility on the European scene ?

Romania is confronting with an issue in trusting people, reticence towards association/cooperation and lack of interest for representing rights and implication in creating and performing legislative system at a national and European level. We need awareness and an institutional cooperation relation honest and transparent and to understand that the purpose is to make people resposible, efficient and solidars, in order to each one raise to a complete social life. The organizations’goal is to reveal the economic situation, cooperation expressing relation of assistance between people. Association between producers is maybe the only manner in which they can raise productivity and competitivity in a world dominated by big producers and large retail chains. The fact agriculture producers need to understand is that agriculture national and comunitary legislation is in continuos changing and it is essential to semnalize some irregularities identified, to affiliate in interproffesional organizations, producer groups and cooperatives, to activly involve to deal with competitiveness and to assure profit and having a socio-economic impact among sustainable development of rural environment.

We need all farmers involvement and active participation to elaborating strategies and politics regarding sustainable development of romanian agro-food sector. This can be achieved only if organizations get to a financial stability and an expert team on juridical and fiscal areas of memebers which can have to be in permanent relations with those and to realize positions and legislative proposals to come in representing legitimate interests and to implement programs for them. Moreover, we need armonization of agriculture legislation acording to a common market organizing inside the European Union. We propose to gain support in the sight of national and comunitary agri-food politics implementation. In addition we are waiting for equal chances of concomitent representation among every sectors and geographical areas from U.E

3rd Interview – Spirits Romania

Managing Director of Pernod-Ricard, Tudor Furir

1. How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of Romanian institutions?

Romania Spirits Association is a non-governmental and independent organization, which brings together major manufacturers and importers of alcoholic drinks in Romania. Spirits Romania was founded in 2013 in order to contribute to creating a functional fiscal and legislative framework favorable to development of local industry of spirits, and from the desire of member companies to engage in the creation of joint programs to educate consumers about responsible consumption of alcohol.

The association has proposed since its foundation to become both a partner and a supporter of the Government in the implementation of measures to create a healthy business environment in the spirits area, by putting his experience and expertise at the disposal of the authorities in this area.

Moreover, the association has demonstrated since its foundation that it is a staunch supporter of the enforcement of legislation in force, being convinced that it must be the premise of a competitive and solid business environment.

Each member of the association Spirits Romania is the owner of an relevant expert-rich, which agreed to voluntarily make it available to authorities precisely for the belief that only thus can lay the foundations of a free and solid market economy with a sustainable growth oriented to medium and long term.

Among its main objectives, we mention:

– ensuring non-discrimination and equal spirits treatment relative to other alcoholic drinks

– promoting moderate and responsible alcohol consumption by supporting consumer education programs

– propose suitable measures to develop a functional and sustainable regulatory framework for the spirits industry in Romania

– ensure good representation of the association members in front of public authorities and consumers

– solving problems facing the spirits industry, especially in combating illegal trade and illicit production of spirits

– monitoring and sharing of best practices and activities with other similar federation from the alcohol industry (wine, beer, etc)

To achieve these goals, Romania Spirits Association conducts a dialogue both with policy makers and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. representatives of similar or related industries). The main element to remember regarding Romania Spirits Association is firmly commitment in supporting the enforcement of legislation, a healthy competitive environment and a high level of transparency regarding the activities undertaken.

2.  How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of European institutions?

Starting in 2013, Romania is affiliated to Spirits Europe, European representative organization of the alcohol industry, which brings together over 32 national associations from 25 countries. Spirits Europe has a set of clearly defined and accepted by all national member associations. Among these objectives, we mention:

– promoting a better understanding of European industry Spirits in relation to policy-makers at international and EU level (with emphasis on the contribution of this sector in the overall economy)

– protecting the freedom to produce and sell alcoholic beverages in a responsible manner by providing an appropriate legislative framework that takes into account the conditions necessary for the production, marketing, distribution and sale of spirits in the European Union

– ensuring non-discriminatory treatment in relation to other spirits

– ensuring open access and fair conditions in the market of third countries

– stimulating the European Union responsible consumption of alcohol and programs aimed at reducing the negative effects of alcohol consumption

– encouraging compliance with the highest environmental standard throughout the entire chain of production and marketing

– identifying and sharing with other members and industry best practices in the field

3. Which are the most common issuse encountered as an agriculture interest group ?

The reference to "agricultural sphere" in question concerns a very broad perspective spirits sector. As you know, decision makers in the agricultural sector have a very hard word to say (from law initiatives and to regulatory approval and notification) in a wide range of issues of interest to members of the Association. We mention some of the main topics of interest, such as regulating the production of fermented alcoholic beverages other than beer and wine, for direct human consumption, the issue of labeling, commercialization or export. These are just some of the topics of interest and each is essential to the smooth running of activities in this area.

But more important to say is that Romania Spirits Association is fully committed to supporting the enforcement of legislation and is also willing to share their members’ experience and expertise. From this angle, the Association of Spirits Romania finds it useful to refer to cooperation between industry and policy makers, the aim being that the final decisions to best fit the requirements and needs of consumers but at the same time, to be conducive to a further development of this important sector in the economy.

To illustrate the importance and complexity of the sector in numbers, we can say that at EU level this is "the most valuable sector of export of agricultural products" (exports 9.6 billion in 2014, representing a commercial surplus of over 8, 6 billion) [1]. Spirits Association of Romania participated and participates in public debates on topics of interest and remains always available for both authorities and all other interested people to share their expertise and vision on this sector.

4. Which are the most important projects that you wish to implement during 2016- 2020 period?

Romania Spirits Association has set clear objectives from the outset, which are consistent with the objectives of both its members and the wider objectives of the Europe Spirits. Certainly achieve these goals remains the main concern of Association, the ultimate goal is, as noted above, provide a correct business climate, competitive, healthy and organic growth-oriented, sustainable long-term.

In addition to that, Romania Spirits Association is the initiator of several social responsibility projects, as a manifestation of openness and desire to create strong links with community members. One of the main projects of the Association in this area aims to prevent and combat alcohol consumption among individuals who have not turned 18. Thus, since last year, Romania Spirits Association launched the campaign "We are many." The association has proposed in this campaign to raise awareness on the serious effects that alcohol has on physical and emotional development of children, in order to combat and prevent alcohol before 18 years. It is a campaign that we intend to continue and expand it in future years. For the begining, the approach was made on three components. The first involves programs to educate and support parents in their efforts to educate children about the effects of alcohol; the second refers to information programs conducted in schools, both for prevention of alcohol to minors, and for the promotion of responsible consumption of alcohol in adulthood; and the third to strictly control children's access to alcohol by overseeing the implementation of specific regulations that prohibit the consumption and sale of alcohol. We intend to deepen the activities carried out under the umbrella of this campaign in all three components described.

5.  Through which methods do you consider the organization you are representing can gain visibility on the European scene ?

Romania Spirits Association is, as previously mentioned, a member of Spirits Europe, representative body at EU level to promote the interests of spirits. Spirits Europe benefit from increased visibility at the European level and enjoys prestige and appreciation in his work. Regarding Spirits Romania, the objective of the association is to fulfill all the objectives set, including priority remains ensuring non-discrimination and equal spirits sector relative to other alcoholic beverages; supporting the development of a regulatory framework for functional and sustainable spirits industry in Romania and promoting moderate and responsible alcohol consumption.

4th Interview – AMSEM – Romania Breeders, Manufacturers and Traders Association for Seeds and Seedlings

General Secretary Gheorghe Hedesan

1. How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of Romanian institutions?

Usually, European standards are implemented even if often in an inadequate situation in Romania. European legislation first of all favors the interests of the state and less of those farmers responsible for ensuring the agricultural development. The barriers consist mainly of government authorities, specifically the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development or the Ministry of Waters, Forests and Environmental Protection, which with all their lack of professionalism doesn’t consult with professional associations about Romania's position or its vote in the European decision-making bodies and did not inform us about the discussions that occur in the body which sometimes lasts for months and years.

2.  How does your organization represent its member’s interests in front of European institutions?

Association ANSEM has a permanent collaboration at the European level with the European Association of Seed which represents the interests of national associations from European member countries and of companies specialized in the field of seeds and plant breeding, besides European authorities and other organizations worldwide that are specialized or tangential to our activity area.

3. Which are the most common issuse encountered as an agriculture interest group ?

The most frequent problems we have are with political and administrative authorities for:

Fair and balanced regulations.

For simplifying procedures.

For the introduction and the usage of interconnected information systems.

For improvement of public servants.

We believe the current European climate of increasingly weak due to politicization and bureaucratization administration of the European Commission and especially of the European Parliament. Elimination of scientific progress among EU activity will increasingly affect more and more agricultural development and professionalism in farming.

4.  Which are the most important projects that you wish to implement during 2016- 2020 period?

Between our future projects during 2016-2020 we mention:

Obtaining admission of scientific progress and of new research techniques in Europe.

Getting the acceptance of special provisions in existing EU decisions for specific cases in some European countries (Romania).

Conducting public-private partnerships in all agriculture and trade areas; elimination of benefits charges from public institutions’ activities.

Raising awareness of members and especially the members of our professional field that we have to associate for matters of mutual interest.

We also have some punctual technical projects for some professional activities.

5.  Through which methods do you consider the organization you are representing can gain visibility on the European scene ?

The main method is to become a stronger organization through participation and economic operators and institutions support for professional activities of AMSEM, both for Romanian and European authorities’ interests. Lack of financial means leads to absence in meetings, conferences and symposiums organized at European level and at the European Association of Seed level.

Bibliography

Books:

Andrew Cartwright 2001. The Return of the Peasant: Land Reform in Post-Communist Romania, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Company Limited.

Cornelia Woll, The brash and the soft-spoken: Lobbying styles in a transatlantic comparison, Interest Groups and Advocacy, 2012.

Ernst Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1958.

Ghiță Ionescu, Roy Jenkins, The European Alternatives: An inquiry into the Policies of the European Community, Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn- The Netherlands, 1979.

H. J. Habakkuk, M. Postan, The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, The industrial revolutions and after: incomes, population and technological changes (II), Volume VI, Cambridge University Press, 1965.

Marjoleine Hennis, Globalization and European integration, The changing role of farmers in the Common Agricultural Policy, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., United States of America, 2005.

Simone Drost, The Agricultural Sector in Poland and Romania and its Performance under the EU-Influence, Freie Universität Berlin, 2013.

Ștefan Tangermann & Stephan von Cramon-Taubadel, Agricultural Policy in the European Union – An Overview, Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung Universität Göttingen, Jan. 2013.

Xabier Itcaina, Antoine Roger and Andy Smith, Institutionalizations compared: Implementating the EU’s 2008 wine reform, France, 2012.

Articles:

Andreas Warntjen/ Arndt Wonka, Governance in Europe The Role of Interest Groups, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft Baden-Baden 2004.

Andrew J. Watson, "The Arab Agricultural Revolution and Its Diffusion, 700-1100," The Journal of Economic History 34(1) (March, 1974).

Andrew Moravcsick, The choice for Europe: Social Purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1998.

Antonie Roger, International Review of Sociology: Revue Internationale de Sociologie, Building an economic field with supranational supports? Lessons from wine production in Romania. Universite de Bordeaux, France, 2012.

Bram Berkhout Lianne Bertling Yannick Bleeker Walter de Wit (EY) Geerten Kruis Robin Stokkel Ri-janne Theuws, EU Report , The Contribution made by Beer to the European Economy, A report commissioned by The Brewers of Europe and conducted by Regioplan Policy Research and EY, Amsterdam, December 2013.

Brewers of Romania, Annual report 2015 Edition.

Christian H.C.A Henning, Moddeling the Political Influence of Interest Groups: Theory and Empirical Evidence from European Agricultural Policy, Governance in Europe. The Role of Interest Groups, Baden-Baden, 2004.

Document of The World Bank, Implementation Completion and Results Report (IBRD-47580) on a loan in the amount of 41.40 Million Euro (USD50.0 Million Equivalents) to Romania for a modernizing agricultural knowledge and information system project, Report No: ICR00002633, October 2013, Sustainable Development Department Central Asia and the Baltic Countries Unit Europe and Central Asia Region.

European Union. 2013. “EUROPA – The EU motto.” Retrieved March 21, 2013.

European Commission, Commission Staff Working Document, Country Report Romania 2016 Including an In-Depth Review on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances, Brussels, 26.02.2016, SWD (2016) 91 final.

European Commission MEMO, CAP Reform – an explanation of the main elements, Brussels, 25 October 2013.

European Commission, Romania Common Agriculture Policy, April 2014.

European Workplace and Alcohol, Case Study Romania.

FEFAC, 58th FEFAC AGM Cologne, Wednesday 10 June 2015 Congress centre “Koelnmesse” Rheinsaal 3 + 5 (North entrance), Securing the future of EU livestock and feed production.

FEFAC, 57th FEFAC Annual General Meeting, 5-6 June 2014, Public Session– “Greening” the landscape for animal nutrition in Europe.

FEFAC, Vision on Feed Safety Management, Sharing responsibility for feed safety along the chain, 22 APRIL 2016 (15) PR 4 V2, p.5.

Food for Thought, A vision for unlocking the potential of agriculture and the food industry in the EU, April 2014.

Iglika Yakova, Czech Republic, ‘Europe’ and its farmers: How is agricultural interest intermediation affected by accession to the EU, European Political Economy Review, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Winter 2005-2006).

Lian Reijlink, Wim van Dalen and Cristina Petcu, Dutch Romanian Alcohol policy Implementation Network, Manual for a local alcohol prevention policy in Romania, The development of alcohol policies in Europe and Romania, March, 2011.

Lucian Luca, Cristian Ghinea, Soros Foundation Romania, Romanian Centre for European Policies, CRPE, Debating Europe Providing Expertise, Two extremes don’t make one right. Romania and the Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU.

Maja Kluger Rasmussen, The influence of Interest Groups in the European Parliament: Does Policy Shape Politics?, Department of Government of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, August, 2012.

Michael Halderman and Michael Nelson, EU Policy- Making: Reform of the CAP and EU Trade in Beef & Dairy with Developing Countries, PPLPI Working Paper No.18, Pro- Poor Livestock Policy Initiative.

Miruna Andreea Balosin, Analyzing EU’s Lobbying, Universitatea „Babes-Bolyai”, Cluj-Napoca.

Nathaniel Page and Răzvan Popa, FAMILY FARMING IN ROMANIA, Fundația ADEPT Transilvania , Saschiz, October 2013.

***, Official Journal of the European Union, Legislation, DEFINITIVE ADOPTION (EU, Euratom) 2015/339 of the European Union’s general budget for the financial year 2015, Volume 58, 13 March 2015.

Pieter Bouwen, Exchanging Access Goods for Access: A Comparative Study of Business Lobbying in the European Union Institutions, European Journal of Political Research 43, 2004.

Popescu Gabriel, Prof. Istudor Nicolae, Prof. Boboc Dan, Competitiveness of Agro-Food and Environmental Economy, Changes And Trends On Wine Market In Romania, Romanian Academy, Bucharest, 2013.

Rainer Eising, Interest groups in EU policy-making, Living Reviews in European Governance, Published by Connecting Excellence on European Governance (CONNEX) and New Modes of Governance (NEWGOV), September, 2008.

Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, Official Journal of the European Union, L 347/487, 20.12.2013.

Sorin Liviu Ștefănescu, Simona Steriu, Monica Dumitrașcu, Strengthening the market of agricultural advice and extension in Romania: New actors involved, Romanian Agricultural Research No.30, 2013.

SpiritsEurope, Road Map 2015, Implementation Report, 2014, Special Report – Company Focus, March 2015.

The Common Agricultural Policy: a story to be continued, Fifty years of living history, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012.

The EU explained: Agriculture, A partnership between Europe and farmers, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014.

USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Global Agricultural Information Network, GAIN Report Number RO1605, Positive prospects for Romanian grain production, 4/12/2016.

Zuzana Bednafiíková, Jifiina Jílková, Why is the Agricultural Lobby in the European Union Member States so effective?, Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, 2012.

Online sources:

http://agrointel.ro

http://cordis.europa.eu

http://ec.europa.eu/index_ro.htm

http://spirits.eu

Home

http://www.agrinet.ro

http://www.aiprom.ro

Acasă

http://www.amsem.ro

Home

Home

http://www.brewersofeurope.org

http://www.britannica.com

Prima pagina

Homepage

Home

http://www.cnproagro.ro

http://www.coceral.com

http://www.copa-cogeca.be/Menu.aspx

Home

http://www.ecpa.eu

Home

http://www.euromalt.be

http://www.euromonitor.com

https://www.euroseeds.eu

Home

Homepage

http://www.g-fras.org

http://www.illegalpesticides.eu

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org

https://www.occrp.org

http://www.pnvv.ro

http://www.romalimenta.ro

Radio România Internațional

http://www.spectrezine.org

ŞtiriAgricole.ro | Portalul agriculturii româneşti

http://www.talkingalcohol.com

http://www.zf.ro