=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper36
|storemode=property
|title=Specialization And Concentration Of Agricultural Production In The Region Of Central Macedonia (Greece)
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper36.pdf
|volume=Vol-1498
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/RagkosSTNBT15
}}
==Specialization And Concentration Of Agricultural Production In The Region Of Central Macedonia (Greece)==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper36.pdf
Specialization And Concentration Of Agricultural
Production In The Region Of Central Macedonia
(Greece)
Athanasios Ragkos1, Vagis Samathrakis2, Alexandros Theodoridis3, Ourania Notta4,
Christos Batzios5 and Elias Tsourapas6
1
Department of Agricultural Technology, Alexander Technology Educational Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece, e-mail: ragkosagrecon@gmail.com
2
Department of Accounting & Finance, Alexander Technology Educational Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece, e-mail: sbagis@acc.teithe.gr
3
School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece,
e-mail: alextheod@vet.auth.gr
4
Department of Agricultural Technology, Alexander Technology Educational Institute of
Thessaloniki, Greece, e-mail: ournotta@farm.teithe.gr
5
School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece,
e-mail: batzios@vet.auth.gr
6
School of Science & Technology, Hellenic Open University, Greece,
e-mail: elts2310@yahoo.gr
Abstract. The purpose of this study is to examine the concentration and
specialization trends of crop and livestock production in the Region of Central
Macedonia, Greece, during the 1980-2006 period. The Region of Central
Macedonia is ranked second in terms of GDP and population among the 13
Greek Regions and the total value of its primary production is the highest in
the country. The analysis indicates low specialization coefficients for most of
the Prefectures in the Region, and high concentration coefficients for crops of
particular economic and social importance for small areas of some Prefectures,
such as olives and tree crops. Traditional livestock sectors such as cow, sheep
and goat farming are widespread in the Region, while, recently introduced
activities, such as pork and poultry production, exhibit considerably high
concentration coefficients. These findings can be of interest in the design of
appropriate management strategies either for market-oriented or formerly
highly protected sectors.
Keywords: Concentration indexes, Specialization coefficients, Concentration
coefficients, Land use, Agricultural policy
1 Introduction
Recent developments in Greek economy have highlighted the necessity of
competitive economic activities, which will contribute to the improvement of basic
economic indicators and will reverse negative trends of employment. European
Union (EU) policies have affected the performance of all sectors of the Greek
304
economy in multiple ways during the past three decades. Amongst them, the
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and its consequences on the Greek agricultural
sector since the country’s adhesion in 1981 constitute the most illustrative examples.
Protectionism in the sector brought about considerable improvements in farm
incomes which, combined with structural interventions and rural development
policies, contributed highly to the development of Greek rural areas. Nevertheless,
the vast expansion of heavily subsidized farming and livestock production activities
rendered the Greek agricultural sector sensitive to the CAP reforms, especially after
1992. As a result, trade constraints altered the Greek trade balance and the farming
sector and isolated agricultural production from market demands, which,
consequently, affected the Greek economy as a whole.
The agricultural sector in Greece, despite its diminishing contribution in GDP and
employment, maintains a relatively high role in the Greek economy. Crop and
livestock production support manufacturing and the multiplicative effects of relevant
investments boost rural economy. At the local or the regional level, agriculture
supports rural family incomes and employment and reverses depopulation and
marginalization of remote, mountainous and less-favored areas. This rough
presentation of the Greek farming sector illustrates its potential for supporting
activities which would assist the recovery of the national economy.
Under the light of the new CAP reform in 2013 (European Commission, 2013), a
further liberalization of agricultural markets is expected to cause additional problems
in the sector’s performance and to affect its multifunctional character, creating
simultaneously new opportunities. After a long period of protectionism, the operation
of a liberalized agricultural sector in the context of financial stress constitutes a
major challenge for Greek policy-makers, which could provide considerable
development opportunities, if appropriate strategies were developed. A late or poor
response to these conditions, on the other hand, would deteriorate existing
deficiencies and would pose additional pressures on the fragile Greek economic
system. Furthermore, growing public awareness concerning environmental protection
points to a shift towards environmental-friendly activities and farming practices,
which would mitigate pressures on ecosystems and would contribute to the
maintenance of biodiversity and water resources (European Commission, 2000).
Within this context, the structure of agricultural production and its temporal and
spatial evolution can provide valuable information concerning the prospects of the
sector. Such an examination will reveal activities of major importance, in terms of
their expansion at the regional or the national level, and small-scale activities at local
level, which take advantage of local particularities and comparative advantages and
play a vital role in local economies. Furthermore, it permits the examination of the
degree to which agricultural production is diversified at a certain geographical level
(local, regional and/or national). Apparently, this approach becomes highly relevant
to the design of development projects and farm policies, while it can also inform
environmental policies, by recognizing linkages between cropping and husbandry
systems and environmental quality.
The issues of changes in cropping patterns and of the restructuring of crop and
livestock production have been examined by numerous authors. The main
methodological approaches include mathematical programming models and Multiple
Criteria Analysis (Dooley et al., 2009; Manos et al., 2010; Zerger et al., 2011). These
305
papers focus on the achievement of goals through the maximization of an objective
function, but do not examine the factors that lead to the formulation of particular
cropping patterns and activities. However, the use of concentration indexes regarding
the description of the Greek agricultural sector has been limited (Samathrakis, 1997;
Samathrakis, 1998, Samathrakis, 1999). These studies discuss the effects of the CAP
on the structure of farming and livestock production activities until 1996, but do not
consider environmental protection policies as well as the impact of the CAP reforms
in 2000 and 2006. Singh and Dhillon (2004) and Leeuwen et al. (2010) examine
concentration and specialization, without providing interpretations of the trends they
record.
The purpose of this study is to examine the concentration of crop and livestock
production as well as the degree of specialization in crop agricultural and livestock
sectors of the Region of Central Macedonia in Greece. The choice of this particular
Region is justified in terms of its importance in crop and livestock production at the
national level and on its high contribution to the Greek agricultural economy. The
methodological framework includes the calculation of concentration indexes for
particular sectors at the Prefectural level and of concentration and specialization
coefficients (Vate, 1983) for sectors at the regional level and for each Prefecture
respectively. The analysis is based on official data from the Greek Statistical
Authority concerning the value of agricultural production for certain years of the
1982-2006 period, in order to account for changes induced by the implementation of
the CAP.
2 The Region of Central Macedonia
The Region of Central Macedonia (RCM) includes seven (7) Prefectures (Imathia,
Thessaloniki, Kilkis, Pella, Pieria, Serres, Chalkidiki) and it is the most developed
among Greek northern Regions, which is due to rich endowments to natural and
human resources, its strategic geographical position, urban development (mainly the
city of Thessaloniki, which is the second most populated city in Greece) and the
dynamic structure of production activities. The primary sector of RCM stood for
22.6% of the total value of primary production in Greece, which is the highest among
13 Regions (Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2014a). According to the Regional
Accounts of the Hellenic Statistical Authority (2014b) sectoral contribution to the
Gross Value Added in RCM for the 2011 was 7.7%, 14.8% και 77.5% for the
primary, secondary and tertiary sectors respectively. Furthermore, about 16.7% of the
labor force in RCM was employed in agriculture in 2011 (Hellenic Statistical
Authority, 2014c).
This rough presentation of RCM illustrates the particular role of the agricultural
sector in Regional economy. The development of the agricultural sector in RCM is
linked to the efficient use of existing natural resources and to transportation,
marketing and processing infrastructures. According to the Agriculture and Livestock
Census in 2009 there were 136,378 crop farms, of average size 4.71ha, operating in
RCM. Irrigated land accounts for 49.2% of total agricultural land, which constitutes a
significant advantage for RCM’s farming sector. The prevailing farming types were
306
formulated under the influence of the CAP, which favored the expansion of cereal
and tobacco in non-irrigated areas and of cotton, sugar beet and maize in irrigated
areas. Tree crops and vineyards are also important for the Region. The livestock
breeding sector is of major importance for RCM; dairy farming is the most
important, but several other activities (sheep –goat, poultry and pork farming) can be
found in most areas. It should be noticed that agriculture and livestock breeding
constitute a major (or the only) sources of income and employment for numerous
mountainous and less-favored areas in RCM.
3 Methodological framework
Concentration indexes constitute one of the numerous methodological tools for the
examination of regional economies. These indexes provide an interpretation of the
relative importance of a product, in terms of concentration, among geographic units.
In spite of their computational simplicity, these indexes cannot fully account for the
degree of specialization of a region in a particular product or the degree of
specialization of a Prefecture, which would enable comparisons among Regions,
Prefectures and products (Samathrakis, 1997).
The drawbacks of the aforementioned indexes are mitigated with the introduction
of concentration and specialization coefficients. These coefficients constitute an
obvious separation criterion of Prefectures for each product under consideration or,
symmetrically, a separation criterion of products in respect to each Prefecture,
regardless the nature of the products. Specifically, the discrimination of Prefectures
or products on the basis of the value of the concentration index (smaller or larger
than 1) is typically similar to the segmentation technique of Belson (Hugues et al.,
1970).
These coefficients can be applied in two cases (Samathrakis, 1997). The
concentration coefficient is a synthetic measure which permits a distinction among
Prefectures, revealing the degree to which a product is concentrated at the regional
level. The specialization coefficient, on the other hand, constitutes a synthetic
criterion of separation of the products under consideration and reflects the degree to
which a Prefecture is specialized in certain products.
The calculation methodology of specialization coefficients includes five steps
(Samathrakis, 1997).
Α. Construction of the concentration index matrix, following Formula (1).
PCIij = [GVPij / TGVPj] / [RGVPi / TRGVP] (1)
where
PCIij: the Concentration Index for j=1,2,…n Prefectures and i=1,2,…m products,
GVPij: the Gross Value of agricultural Production of each product in each
Prefecture,
TGVPj: the Total Gross Value of agricultural Production in each Prefecture,
RGVPi: the Gross Value of Production of each product in the Region and
TRGVP: the Total Gross Value of agricultural Production η in the Region.
307
This index reflects the specialization of each Prefecture in certain activities and
allows for comparisons between each Prefecture and the Region. The index equals
zero (0) if the product under consideration is not produced in a Prefecture, while
there is not a specific maximum value. If the index exceeds 1, the product is
relatively more frequent in a particular Prefecture than in the Region and,
consequently, the Prefecture has relative position more important to the specific
product than to other products .
If the value of the ratio is greater than 1, this means that this product is relatively
more frequent in this county than in the Region and same time that this State has
relative position more important to the specific product than for other products.
Β. Construction of the derived specialization index matrix for each product, by
focusing on “Core Prefectures”, that is the Prefectures for which the concentration
index value exceeds 100 for a particular product.
C. Calculation of deviations between “actual” and “theoretical” values of the
derived matrix (Εi) for each product. “Theoretical” values correspond to those
obtained if the relative percentage of a product in “Core Prefectures” was equal to the
corresponding percentage for all products. The separation of Prefectures based on
values of the concentration index that exceed 100 defines a classification for which
the deviation is maximized. This attribute forms the basis for the segmentation
criterion.
D. Calculation of maximum deviations (Ε*i) for each product. For any given
regional distribution of the product under consideration the index Εi reaches a
maximum (denoted Ε*i). This maximum is linked to the concept of “ideal partition”,
which would enable to forecast the concentration of a product with zero error
probability.
E. Calculation of the concentration coefficient (Si) for each product (Εi/Ε*i). The
coefficient obtains values within the {0,1} interval and permits comparisons of
concentration indexes for each product in the Region. Hence, the production of X is
more concentrated than the production of Y if SX > SY.
By means of the same methodological steps, but reversing products and
Prefectures, one may obtain specialization coefficients for a Prefecture (Sj).
Prefecture A is, then, more specialized than Prefecture B if SA > SB.
Data for the calculation of specialization and concentration coefficients include
the Gross Value of production for most crops and livestock sectors in all seven
Prefectures of the Region of Central Macedonia. The analysis focuses on years 1982,
1986, 1991, 1996, 2003 and 2006, which cover for the whole period from the
adhesion of Greece in the EEC (1981) to the implementation of the most recent CAP
reform (Regulation (EC) 1782/2003, European Commission, 2003).
4 Results of the analysis
The concentration coefficients for the main products in RCM for the 1982-2006
period are presented in Table 1.
308
Table 1. Concentration coefficients of the main agricultural and livestock products in the
Region of Central Macedonia (1982 – 2006)
Years
PRODUCTS
1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006
Cereal 0.31 0.25 0.24 0.28 0.14 0.17
Durum wheat 0.53 0.37 0.60 0.33 0.46 0.29
Maize 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.13 0.28 0.27
Rice 0.81 0.57 0.56 0.58 0.52 0.51
Industrial and aromatic plants 0.24 0.20 0.23 0.35 0.32 0.36
Cotton 0.32 0.23 0.12 0.30 0.24 0.38
Sugar Beet 0.34 0.36 0.40 0.45 0.32 0.34
Tobacco 0.29 0.35 0.30 0.38 0.43 0.42
Sunflower 0.51 0.48 0.57 0.76 0.59 0.62
Vegetables 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.12
Potatoes 0.25 0.24 0.36 0.48 0.28 0.35
Industrial tomato 0.26 0.24 0.29 0.26 0.16 0.17
Edible legumes 0.22 0.33 0.47 0.60 0.68 0.35
Legumes for fodder 0.29 0.54 0.61 0.78 0.43 0.35
Fodder crops 0.21 0.29 0.20 0.26 0.24 0.25
Olive oil 0.79 0.62 0.81 0.63 0.59 0.59
Wine 0.39 0.28 0.37 0.35 0.18 0.25
Fruit 0.65 0.64 0.65 0.68 0.61 0.54
Apples 0.61 0.55 0.50 0.61 0.60 0.55
Apricots 0.73 0.65 0.87 0.63 0.66 0.52
Peaches 0.66 0.69 0.71 0.69 0.65 0.59
Cherries 0.50 0.58 0.47 0.64 0.57 0.55
Nuts 0.34 0.30 0.30 0.34 0.45 0.43
Beef cattle meat 0.17 0.15 0.20 0.27 0.30 0.30
Lamb meat 0.08 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.18 0.19
Goat meat 0.14 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.26 0.25
Pork meat 0.12 0.21 0.22 0.35 0.46 0.43
Poultry meat 0.21 0.38 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.49
Cow milk 0.23 0.27 0.28 0.43 0.44 0.48
Sheep milk 0.14 0.16 0.12 0.16 0.13 0.19
Goat milk 0.19 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.20
Eggs 0.14 0.38 0.26 0.34 0.39 0.35
309
The results do not indicate high concentration trends for arable crops in RCM,
which are found in almost all areas of the Region. Concentration indexes for each
Prefecture are reported in the Appendix.
4.1 Concentration of agricultural production in the Region of Central
Macedonia
4.1.1 Crop Production
Cereal are the main crops in non-irrigated, mountainous and less-favored areas.
Durum wheat is cultivated by most farms in these areas, mainly because of heavy
subsidization, especially from 1981 to 2006, as the quality premium substantially
increased prices. The corresponding concentration coefficient varies between years,
depending on international prices and weather conditions, which affect yields.
Durum wheat is suitable for marginal land and is characterized by low input
requirements, which results in a rather positive environmental impact.
Rice production in the Region is highly concentrated, as the concentration
coefficient varies from 0.51-0.81. The two centers of rice production in Central
Macedonia are in Thessaloniki and Serres, where its economic and environmental
role is vital, as it develops sloping and low-quality land, which is inappropriate for
other crops.
Cotton is a predominant crop in Greece and of particular importance for RCM. It
extends in irrigated areas of almost all Prefectures and exhibits high concentration
indexes in the Prefectures of Serres, Pella (especially in Giannitsa plain) and Imathia
(especially during the early years of implementation of CAP in Greece). The subsidy
system, based on acreage, substantially improved farm incomes in the Region;
however, the high concentration of cotton crops in protected areas with
environmental problems (Lake Kerkini in Serres, Axios Delta in Thessaloniki)
resulted in extended pollution of water reserves, due to intensive use of agrochemical
inputs (nitrogen, herbicides, insecticides) (Ragkos and Psychoudakis, 2009).
Sugar beet constitutes a crop of major economic importance for Greek
agriculture. Its production is based on contract farming, supervised by the Hellenic
Sugar Industry (HSI). The HSI is responsible for the implementation of the EU
policy in the sugar sector and also for sugar beet procession and the production of
sugar. Central Macedonia is one of the main Regions in sugar production. The
concentration coefficient of the crop in the Region is relatively high, which implies
the existence of sugar beet production cells, developed around the sugar processing
factories in RCM. During the years under consideration, one observes a declining
concentration index for sugar beet in Pella, with a corresponding increase in the
concentration index in Serres, which is due to developments in the operation of the
sugar factories in the two Prefectures.
Tobacco constitutes a heavily subsidized crop which boosted farm incomes,
contributed to the reversion of depopulation trends in rural areas and affected their
social structures. The subsidy system induced the expansion of foreign irrigated
varieties (Virginia, Burley) at the expense of domestic quality varieties (Basmas),
310
which, nonetheless, had competitive advantages in markets, formulating tobacco
production cells in the Prefectures of Pieria, Serres (particularly in Nigrita and
Visaltia) and Pella. Concentration coefficients for tobacco increase from 1982 to
2006, when subsidies were decoupled from production.
Sunflower constitutes an alternative crop to tobacco and winter cereal, in order to
develop non-irrigated areas of the Region under the light of CAP reforms. Its
perspective in the production of biofuel results in a considerably high concentration
coefficient, which implies its major importance for certain areas in the Region.
During the first years of the period under examination the main production centers of
sunflowers were met in Pella, Kilkis and Thessaloniki; recently (2003 and thereafter)
the relevant concentration index is very high for the Prefecture of Imathia.
The concentration coefficient for vegetables is low during the 1982-2006 period,
as their production is scattered in numerous areas of all the Prefectures.
Protectionism in the vegetable sector has been relatively low, compared to other
crops, hence vegetable crops stand for a small percentage of the total irrigated area.
Nevertheless, they constitute the basic perspective for the farming sector of RCM, as
they adapt well to soil and climate conditions, they develop its comparative
advantages and are predominantly market-oriented. Opportunities of the sector are
linked to the improvement of transportation, marketing and processing infrastructure,
which would induce the creation of production cells in specific areas, increasing the
concentration coefficient. Industrial tomato in the Prefecture of Serres is an
illustrative example, as the concentration index was relatively high until 2003, while
tomato processing units were operating in the Prefecture, and was considerably
reduced thereafter.
Edible legumes exhibit high concentration coefficients during the period after
1991 (0.35-0.68), due their concentration in areas of Serres and Pieria. Crops of this
category are typical examples of locally important crops, which use excessive farm
family labor and are oriented to market demand.
Olive oil, although a typical Mediterranean Greek product, is of relatively low
importance to RCM. The high concentration coefficient of this product (0.59-0.81) is
interpreted in conjunction to its high concentration index for Chalkidiki. Olive oil is
important for the rural economy of the Prefecture, as it constitutes a supplementary
source of income for numerous families. The implementation of strategies aiming at
the enhancement of quality and marketing conditions could improve its potential for
RCM.
The concentration of wine production follows a decreasing pattern. The
concentration index for wine, which reaches a minimum at 2003 (0.18), depicts the
results of the CAP, as the restrictions introduced in 2000 brought about a significant
decrease in the number and acreage of vineyards. Wine production, on the other
hand, provides many areas of RCM with development opportunities, linked to the
production of quality wines. The concentration coefficient is particularly low for
2003 and 2006, due to the emergence of such areas in all Prefectures, through wine
tourism initiatives (e.g. “Wine Routes”).
Tree crops exhibit a high concentration coefficient (0.54-0.68), although
declining during recent years. This is due to the intensive production of fruit, mainly
in the Prefectures of Imathia and Pella. The predominance of tree crops in these
Prefecture is due to favorable climate and soil conditions as well as to heavy
311
protectionism in the sector, mainly until 1992. These activities are vital to the
economy of both Prefectures, as they provide income and employment to many farm
families and they support considerable investments in processing and transportation.
Nuts are treated as a separate category within the analysis. Their high
concentration coefficients are explained through their high concentration index in the
Prefectures of Pieria, Kilkis and Chalkidiki, where they play an important role at the
local level.
4.1.2 Livestock production
The dynamics of the livestock production sector in RCM are illustrated through
the concentration indexes and coefficients for livestock products (Table 1). The
production of cow milk exhibits an increasing concentration trend in the period under
examination. During the first years, heavy protectionism resulted in the appearance
of dairy farms in almost all areas of RCM. From 1991 and thereafter, increasing
concentration coefficients (from 0.28 to 0.48) reflect the consequences of the quota
regime. Production rights were gathered to fewer producers and large-scale dairy
farms were formulated in some areas, mainly in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki. These
farms undertook substantial investments in fixed capital and animal resources and
pursued the amelioration of productivity.
Beef production is mainly concentrated in the Prefecture of Kilkis. However, the
rearing of small, indigenous buffalos constitutes a typical activity for Kerkini area in
the Prefecture of Serres. The economic performance of this production system is
more than satisfactory, while it also contributes to the protection of indigenous
genetic resources and biodiversity.
Pork production is mainly concentrated in the Prefecture of Pieria and in some
areas of Imathia and Kilkis, which exhibit the highest indexes. Its importance for
these regions is linked to the achievement of economies of scale by pork farms,
which exhibit highly entrepreneurial characteristics. Poultry production also
constitutes an intensive entrepreneurial activity, which cannot be undertaken by
family farms typically operating in RCM. Considerable investments in the sector in
the Prefecture of Thessaloniki result in a high concentration coefficient for RCM,
mostly in recent years.
Sheep and goat farming is a typical activity for mountainous, less-favored and
remote Greek areas. In RCM, the production of sheep and goat milk follows the same
pattern; concentration coefficients are low during the whole 1982-2006 period, due to
the existence of such areas in the whole acreage of RCM. The sector is of vital
economic and social importance for these areas, because it uses land with no
alternative uses for pastures and provides employment and income to farm families,
where the rural economy is not diversified and alternative activities are not readily
available. Meat production is even less concentrated, but a slightly increasing trend is
observed for recent years, due to the operation of new processing centers in various
areas. The substantial reduction of the concentration index for goat meat in
Chalkidiki is counterbalanced by an increase in Pieria, which is indicative of the
aforementioned developments.
312
It is worth to notice that concentration indexes for fodder crops and maize do not
follow the same pattern with livestock production (not even dairy farming, which is
heavily dependent on roughages), contrary to what was expected. Hence, these crops
did not evolve in the centers of livestock production in RCM; on the contrary, they
are scattered in all irrigated areas of the Region. This spatial organization of fodder
production, reflected in the concentration indexes, implies inefficiencies in livestock
production, as feeding costs are burdened with transportation costs, and potential
market failures occur, given the distance between production cells of livestock
products and fodder.
4.2 Specialization trends in the Prefectures of RCM
Table 2 presents the specialization coefficients of the Prefectures of RCM during
the period under consideration. Imathia exhibits the highest coefficient among all
seven Prefectures, as was expected, due to the predominance of tree crops. The
common characteristic of the other six Prefectures is the relatively low specialization
coefficient, which does not exceed 0.4 in most cases. This illustrates the structure of
the agricultural sector in RCM, characterized by the large number of small family
farms, which adopt a relatively large number of crops and livestock breeding
activities. The broad range of farming types is typical for Greek Regions and for
other Mediterranean countries.
Table 2. Specialization coefficients of the Prefectures of the Region of Central Macedonia
(1982 – 2006)
Prefectures
Years
Imathia Thessaloniki Kilkis Pella Pieria Serres Chalkidiki
1982 0.451 0.313 0.269 0.258 0.330 0.207 0.354
1986 0.473 0.287 0.327 0.234 0.345 0.260 0.362
1991 0.448 0.279 0.291 0.330 0.364 0.212 0.391
1996 0.355 0.401 0.439 0.336 0.411 0.282 0.536
2003 0.669 0.127 0.358 0.372 0.334 0.256 0.440
2006 0.576 0.296 0.246 0.303 0.568 0.378 0.394
An examination of the specialization coefficients over time reveals increasing
specialization trends for four (4) Prefectures in recent years. These trends are due to
effects of the CAP, which favored the expansion of a small number of farming
activities through the subsidization scheme, combined with the emergence of
innovative crops at the local level. The Prefecture of Serres is an example of the
former category, where arable crops prevail; nonetheless, these specialization trends
do not conform with environmental policies, as the presence of protected areas (lake
Kerkini, protected under the Ramsar Convention) calls for the adoption of activities
with minimum agrochemical input requirements. In the latter category, the Prefecture
of Imathia is further specialized in tree crops, feed crops and pork production, that is,
in activities that develop its comparative advantages. In Pella, it is worth to notice the
313
increasing importance of tree crops and of certain industrial crops. The Prefecture of
Pieria specializes in activities that are explicitly market-oriented, including poultry
production, vineyards and vegetable production
The specialization coefficients of the remaining three Prefectures of RCM
(Thessaloniki, Kilkis and Chalkidiki) remain relatively steady during the period
under examination. In Thessaloniki, soil and climate conditions, existing
infrastructures and the general economic context favor investments in a relatively
broad range of production types. In Kilkis, the low specialization coefficient is due to
the diversified livestock breeding sector and to the low percentage of irrigated land
(21.1%, Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2005), which only permits a limited range of
production activities and discourages the formulation of innovative production
centers. Last but not least, the predominance of a relatively small number of
traditional farming activities in Chalkidiki results in relatively high specialization
coefficients for all years.
An interesting observation stems from the fact that specialization coefficients in
1996 are considerably higher for all Prefectures, except for Imathia. This
demonstrates the effects of the 1992 CAP reform, which introduced subsidies per
acre or per animal, rather than depending on the produced quantity, and established
the milk quota regime. This shift in policy favored the expansion of heavily
subsidized sectors, mainly dairy farming, maize and durum wheat, which substituted
soft wheat in arid land.
5 Conclusions
The use of concentration and specialization indexes and coefficients constitutes a
rather simple approach, aiming at the examination of concentration trends of crop
and livestock production at the Regional level, while specialization coefficients
permit comparisons among Prefectures. In this study, such indicators are the basis of
a critical presentation of the crop and livestock breeding sectors of the Region of
Central Macedonia, which aims at an interpretation of the factors that affected their
structure. The empirical analysis revealed sectors which are common for all areas in
the Region and others, which are typical of particular areas and Prefecture, thus
increasing their corresponding concentration indexes.
The calculated indexes and coefficients yield valuable information concerning the
prospects of the agricultural and livestock breeding sectors of RCM. The choice of
the appropriate development strategy at the Regional and/or the Prefectural level
should take into account the spatial distribution of each crop, along with its relative
importance to specific areas and to the Region as a whole, in order to boost the
efficiency of agriculture and to provide economic development opportunities.
Arable crops predominate in almost all areas, therefore presenting relatively low
concentration coefficients. The perspectives of these crops, so far heavily protected
by the CAP, are linked to the future of EU policies. Furthermore, low concentration
coefficients indicate their geographical spread, therefore strategies concerning their
continuation can be designed at the Regional level, as consequences of such
strategies would affect producers in a similar way. On the other hand, sectors
314
exhibiting high concentration coefficients may formulate the axes on which to design
targeted strategies in order to resolve endogenous problems of the Greek farming
sector. Such activities can be incorporated into quality systems, which take into
account comparative advantages and market demands, in order to mitigate the effects
of high production costs of Greek farms. Strategies based on quality and alternative
marketing approaches are also applicable to heavily subsidized concentrated crops,
such as tobacco, given that their substitution in their production centers is difficult to
achieve.
The proposed strategies for each product should, nonetheless, take into account
the specialization at the Prefecture level and incorporate adjustments in order to
accommodate differences. Prefectures with high specialization coefficients are
characterized by the predominance of crops with particular contribution to incomes
and employment at the local level; in this case, proposed strategies should focus on
existing activities, emphasizing on marketing, quality and processing, thereby
facilitating their access to markets. On the contrary, low specialization coefficients
point out less opportunities for targeted measures for particular activities. This case
calls for generalized strategies, aiming at the mitigation of structural deficiencies, the
enhancement of basic infrastructure for all activities (for example transportation) and
favorable economic conditions to induce investments.
The environmental impact of highly concentrated activities should also
constitutes an important element in policy design. The presence of concentrated
production centers in environmentally sensitive areas calls for the introduction of
special initiatives, in accordance with the environmental policy in force (Dir. (EC)
60/2000 and (EC) 43/92). Farm education in environmental issues, agrochemical
input control and the introduction of alternative farming practices (integrated crop
management and organic farming) constitute examples of potential relevant actions.
Environmental awareness is nowadays well-established in the design and
implementation of agricultural policy measures. The methodological framework
presented in this paper provides additional possibilities of further incorporation of
environmental issues in decision-making.
References
1. Dooley A., Smeaton D., Sheath G. and Ledgard S. (2009) Application of
multiple criteria decision analysis in the New Zealand agricultural industry.
Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 16, p. 39-53.
2. European Commission (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community
action in the field of water policy, Official Journal of the European
Communities, L327, Brussels.
3. European Commission (2003) Council Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003
establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common
agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and
amending Regulations (EEC) No. 2019/93, (EC) No. 1452/2001, (EC) No.
315
1453/2001, (EC) No. 1454/2001, (EC) No. 1868/94, (EC) No. 1251/1999, (EC)
No. 1254/1999, (EC) No. 1673/2000, (EEC) No. 2358/71 and (EC) No.
2529/2001.
4. European Commission (2013) Overview of CAP reform, Agricultural Policy
Perspectives Brief, No 5, 2013.
5. European Community (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on
the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, Official Journal
of the European Communities, L206, Brussels.
6. Greek Statistical Authority (2005) Results census of agriculture and livestock
2001. Athens: Hellenic Statistical Authority.
7. Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2014a.http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/
ESYE/PAGEthemes?p_param=A0703&r_param=SEL48&y_param=TS&mytab
s=0, accessed in 17 May 2014.
8. Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2014b. http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/
ESYE/PAGEthemes?p_param=A0703&r_param=SEL45&y_param=TS&mytab
s=0, accessed in 17 May 2014.
9. Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2014c. http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/
ESYE/PAGEthemes?p_param=A0703&r_param=SEL54&y_param=TS&mytab
s=0, accessed in 17 May 2014.
10. Hugues M. (1970) Segmentation et typologie. Paris: Bordas.
11. Leeuwen E., Strijker D. and Terluin I. (2010) Regional concentration and
specialisation in agricultural activities in EU-9 regions (1950-2000). European
Spatial Research and Policy, 17(1), p. 23-39.
12. Manos B., Bournaris T. and Chatzinikolaou P. (2010) Tobacco decoupling
impacts on income, employment and environment in european tobacco regions.
International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 4, p. 281-297.
13. Ragkos A. and Psychoudakis A. (2009) Minimizing adverse environmental
effects of agriculture: A multi-objective programming approach. Operational
research: An international journal, 9, p. 267-280.
14. Samathrakis V. (1997) The trends of specialization and concentration of
agricultural production in the Greek regions. Annals Economics, 98, p. 42-49.
(in Greek)
15. Samathrakis V. (1998) Les répercussions de la politique européenne des prix et
des marches sur les régions Grecques. MEDIT, 1, p. 48-57.
16. Samathrakis V. (1999) The degree of support of the Greek production of
agricultural products from the CAP: analysis at regional level. Geotechnical
Scientific Issues, 1, p. 84-104. (in Greek)
17. Singh J. and Dhillon S. (2004) Agricultural Geography. Delhi: Tata McGraw-
Hill.
18. Vate M. (1983). Une mesure synthétique des spécificités régionales, Revue d’
economie régionale et urbaine, 3, p. 407-421.
316
19. Zerger A., Warren G., Hill P., Robertson D., Weidemann A. and Lawton K.
(2011) Multi-criteria assessment for linking regional conservation planning and
farm-scale actions. Environmental Modelling and Software, 26, p. 103-110.
Appendix 1. Concentration indexes for each Prefecture in RCM (1982 - 2006)
THESSALONIKI CHALKIDIKI
PRODUCTS
1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006 1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006
Cereals 143.8 125.1 117.6 202.0 131.5 128.9 145.6 129.5 93.0 38.5 92.2 70.7
Durum wheat 189.5 108.9 49.2 168.2 154.2 126.5 426.4 279.1 739.9 0.0 293.8 214.7
Maize 121.8 78.6 91.4 100.5 51.9 65.1 5.7 10.3 14.8 28.0 8.3 10.1
Rice 499.6 333.3 268.4 140.5 204.3 204.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Edible legumes 67.3 40.6 21.5 7.2 42.3 75.8 118.2 86.2 4.0 19.6 34.9 250.3
Industrial and aromatic plants 58.5 62.8 72.8 47.0 59.1 25.5 16.2 32.5 26.1 21.4 38.3 20.4
Tobacco 50.8 37.9 53.6 36.8 45.9 67.9 14.3 11.1 16.1 4.1 4.3 8.9
Cotton 98.5 119.1 122.7 64.5 72.8 3.9 22.8 67.9 48.6 46.0 22.3 21.6
Sugar beet 33.5 14.2 26.1 22.3 41.3 39.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sunflower 0.0 82.9 363.5 449.1 103.4 87.9 0.0 137.8 32.7 15.9 1.5 1.2
Vegetables 159.0 158.3 130.7 133.0 89.3 115.5 121.2 146.2 83.9 156.5 293.4 196.1
Potatoes 63.6 72.5 36.7 68.6 37.3 66.3 31.3 103.9 129.0 122.3 114.3 51.5
Industrial tomato 77.6 92.4 84.5 100.5 107.4 136.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.7 229.6
Legumes for fodder 119.9 118.1 0.6 459.9 33.0 114.1 113.9 364.9 1.2 0.0 14.4 13.0
Fodder crops 105.6 84.3 127.2 169.5 175.1 154.6 47.6 51.1 117.4 34.2 13.1 58.4
Wine 19.2 93.4 139.6 132.7 108.2 88.9 77.8 208.9 231.7 187.8 194.0 295.4
Olive oil 10.4 64.5 25.4 49.2 30.5 47.9 1219.2 992.0 1165.6 1100.7 652.9 851.9
Fruit 7.1 8.3 7.2 5.1 8.4 9.8 32.1 27.4 37.1 24.3 41.5 58.7
Nuts 56.1 78.9 45.6 56.7 18.9 22.3 126.3 135.9 197.1 162.1 357.6 218.6
Beef cattle meat 77.5 115.3 111.3 140.5 126.1 101.5 38.1 36.8 26.6 24.6 26.2 29.3
Lamb meat 111.4 94.0 95.6 111.7 129.7 148.2 68.0 47.8 68.4 59.5 64.4 69.7
Goat meat 111.9 83.1 95.5 113.9 121.7 131.2 249.7 268.2 259.8 247.3 119.2 114.1
Pork meat 98.8 121.8 82.3 51.9 45.3 35.2 133.8 98.8 76.7 78.6 79.5 92.2
Poultry meat 196.4 277.4 190.9 165.8 186.8 173.8 78.3 54.9 31.8 78.2 92.6 73.4
Cow milk 176.0 170.3 187.4 206.8 264.3 322.4 27.2 19.1 21.9 18.7 1.6 1.6
Sheep milk 101.7 118.5 113.8 106.4 117.8 142.6 65.1 59.2 68.0 71.3 73.8 78.1
Goat milk 82.4 116.7 111.0 99.9 82.2 100.1 306.5 247.8 234.8 218.8 275.4 284.1
Eggs 164.8 276.1 210.4 253.7 278.6 254.4 92.4 79.0 64.4 56.8 32.7 90.2
PIERIA IMATHIA
PRODUCTS
1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006 1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006
Cereals 24.6 61.8 70.1 68.7 79.1 64.6 32.9 39.2 53.3 81.0 110.0 110.4
Durum wheat 5.0 33.8 32.5 95.2 68.5 105.7 1.5 15.2 11.9 27.9 21.0 13.5
Maize 60.1 59.8 52.0 95.8 82.3 45.5 68.5 90.1 119.6 146.2 73.1 79.2
Rice 0.0 0.0 28.3 9.0 69.1 40.1 0.0 6.7 0.9 372.3 273.0 266.6
Edible legumes 255.8 418.8 592.0 369.6 945.9 324.5 49.3 53.2 4.9 43.2 10.5 12.4
Industrial and aromatic plants 221.7 190.6 245.7 220.3 80.8 51.4 134.0 103.4 62.9 70.5 82.3 102.0
Tobacco 287.4 299.3 369.5 399.3 117.6 46.2 58.0 36.9 33.8 44.9 18.8 5.3
Cotton 59.2 44.6 53.0 34.5 60.3 54.9 306.9 205.0 90.2 91.8 116.6 133.1
Sugar beet 165.2 112.2 121.3 55.1 63.3 47.2 239.7 200.7 156.2 151.5 127.0 117.4
Sunflower 0.0 3.3 0.1 0.5 33.4 38.5 253.5 4.8 2.7 0.0 455.7 439.7
317
Vegetables 73.6 70.9 41.5 50.2 107.2 101.8 53.4 65.4 49.1 56.5 98.6 90.6
Potatoes 65.3 38.0 30.9 16.6 16.8 28.3 30.0 19.5 2.0 13.2 51.9 22.4
Industrial tomato 4.7 45.8 49.8 41.4 56.0 41.4 100.1 202.9 38.4 76.5 129.2 62.2
Legumes for fodder 199.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 198.9 207.5
Fodder crops 75.8 58.2 59.6 79.3 107.4 132.5 38.0 24.0 43.2 71.3 53.7 53.6
Wine 128.8 33.2 10.0 11.2 189.3 135.7 359.0 238.7 230.5 194.0 112.2 131.2
Olive oil 41.0 67.2 44.9 58.4 299.6 56.9 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.8 0.4 5.3
Fruit 48.4 57.0 47.9 34.4 67.9 99.4 337.9 331.8 334.2 259.2 243.3 236.2
Nuts 401.1 248.1 231.0 127.3 276.7 137.5 34.6 36.8 62.8 36.9 19.1 13.8
Beef cattle meat 45.4 15.0 22.3 10.8 19.2 18.4 131.5 110.4 167.0 135.8 86.8 67.1
Lamb meat 138.6 106.9 114.0 78.4 124.9 103.5 65.9 56.8 77.1 73.0 15.7 10.8
Goat meat 107.7 156.3 91.6 128.4 201.5 164.8 51.5 39.3 39.5 39.8 10.4 9.6
Pork meat 182.2 236.6 209.4 177.4 193.5 199.0 104.8 112.8 176.3 152.5 258.9 225.7
Poultry meat 100.9 58.7 140.6 168.2 241.6 428.5 17.5 18.0 23.4 26.3 10.0 7.0
Cow milk 60.2 24.0 32.2 13.8 25.9 17.6 52.5 42.2 47.2 27.2 25.7 16.5
Sheep milk 149.8 93.8 114.7 77.5 97.8 73.6 57.1 48.7 56.9 48.4 75.3 69.4
Goat milk 158.2 129.5 150.5 152.6 171.4 130.1 46.7 40.6 39.4 51.4 56.2 54.7
Eggs 78.7 60.5 67.7 46.9 104.6 164.0 70.5 57.2 66.4 55.2 25.7 22.7
KILKIS SERRES
PRODUCTS
1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006 1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006
Cereals 156.1 133.1 175.6 120.3 112.5 92.6 128.1 148.5 141.2 105.2 112.6 141.9
Durum wheat 198.3 182.2 134.3 334.6 272.5 213.2 13.3 164.9 64.1 102.0 20.0 108.6
Maize 9.9 21.2 38.1 92.4 76.1 73.2 200.4 221.1 202.5 126.6 242.7 236.9
Rice 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 133.7 188.3 41.2 32.5 58.2
Edible legumes 26.1 44.1 2.9 9.8 16.6 17.9 127.3 65.5 103.7 264.7 30.1 94.8
Industrial and aromatic plants 53.1 72.7 85.5 43.4 31.0 41.2 103.5 121.7 128.0 173.2 213.1 224.2
Tobacco 63.7 78.8 100.4 30.0 26.1 54.0 115.9 140.0 115.2 104.9 271.8 245.8
Cotton 24.9 22.7 74.6 6.9 37.5 41.2 39.4 69.0 112.5 246.2 179.9 215.7
Sugar beet 46.2 56.4 38.9 16.2 21.3 15.6 139.7 197.7 242.3 292.5 230.2 258.4
Sunflower 207.3 567.2 0.0 5.7 5.3 3.5 27.6 27.1 86.9 4.9 0.2 0.3
Vegetables 75.8 55.5 57.2 55.0 49.4 42.2 96.5 69.0 98.0 117.4 78.7 88.8
Potatoes 137.0 123.6 81.8 204.9 160.3 72.1 167.3 173.5 263.2 306.8 165.1 233.7
Industrial tomato 45.1 0.0 81.8 79.9 73.8 92.3 190.6 122.6 239.4 237.8 151.2 87.7
Legumes for fodder 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 351.8 32.2 170.9 0.0 179.8 0.0 20.5 41.3
Fodder crops 126.2 236.0 121.5 100.4 69.5 130.2 171.0 172.1 147.5 153.8 133.6 139.5
Wine 104.4 71.4 73.1 201.7 86.5 90.3 7.8 54.0 53.7 52.4 82.6 51.1
Olive oil 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.5 7.8 40.5 51.1 17.0 78.3 103.6 97.3
Fruit 10.7 8.6 7.8 2.6 9.7 4.1 6.3 6.5 11.7 5.8 2.7 7.0
Nuts 168.2 88.0 127.4 214.1 203.6 135.5 85.6 159.1 139.5 200.3 92.6 242.2
Beef cattle meat 170.6 191.1 168.9 245.1 307.1 366.3 117.9 99.5 102.9 72.7 83.9 100.1
Lamb meat 113.7 172.4 169.6 203.5 87.6 100.1 97.4 122.2 116.3 110.1 149.6 140.6
Goat meat 79.3 96.0 168.2 106.0 64.6 83.2 103.2 102.6 91.5 109.4 162.5 164.5
Pork meat 88.8 101.9 59.2 338.6 205.7 184.2 54.8 52.7 107.5 53.7 10.0 10.2
Poultry meat 71.5 34.3 36.4 52.8 80.2 26.8 106.9 81.3 124.2 116.8 63.5 44.9
318
Cow milk 151.3 195.5 184.8 343.0 160.8 143.0 105.3 111.1 101.5 77.2 26.6 26.2
Sheep milk 165.9 219.0 178.7 284.8 182.5 201.6 78.6 92.3 100.6 85.7 73.3 65.3
Goat milk 99.4 107.8 131.3 198.0 120.3 121.6 69.8 87.8 76.3 64.1 49.8 47.7
Eggs 110.9 101.7 115.3 45.1 54.0 92.2 88.8 7.6 92.4 89.3 79.7 67.6
PELLA
PRODUCTS
1982 1986 1991 1996 2003 2006
Cereals 51.1 56.1 48.0 25.7 44.3 53.0
Durum
40.7 7.0 22.8 30.2 19.8 29.4
wheat
Maize 84.3 95.7 68.0 63.0 94.1 103.3
Rice 0.0 8.3 0.6 1.4 0.8 0.2
Edible
109.1 106.7 114.9 1.0 18.1 70.8
legumes
Industrial
and aromatic 121.7 107.3 97.1 92.4 123.1 146.2
plants
Tobacco 138.9 115.0 94.3 101.4 136.8 181.3
Cotton 109.1 112.4 122.8 94.1 122.1 142.6
Sugar
58.6 64.0 45.0 46.4 115.2 106.1
beet
Sunflower 201.5 64.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Vegetables 92.8 116.8 161.4 109.2 80.7 96.3
Potatoes 131.9 135.1 97.9 9.9 147.7 158.1
Industrial
127.1 122.8 83.0 58.5 67.0 95.5
tomato
Legumes for
77.7 283.2 345.8 0.0 102.1 175.3
fodder
Fodder crops 69.9 66.4 59.2 26.3 68.6 29.7
Wine 96.3 57.6 5.9 14.1 23.8 26.5
Olive oil 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.7
Fruit 237.1 229.0 226.1 260.8 275.5 228.6
Nuts 32.1 19.3 32.8 27.9 27.5 24.0
Beef cattle
85.0 95.6 64.1 71.4 42.1 50.9
meat
Lamb meat 104.1 93.7 76.1 86.7 101.2 111.7
Goat meat 70.9 72.5 66.4 60.6 57.2 58.8
Pork meat 110.2 40.5 30.5 30.2 16.2 22.8
Poultry meat 73.3 52.9 63.3 57.7 67.3 37.2
Cow milk 61.4 72.0 56.9 48.0 87.4 99.1
Sheep milk 110.0 82.6 83.1 104.0 92.4 87.6
Goat milk 92.1 64.6 65.5 72.1 95.2 88.7
Eggs 70.7 59.3 24.8 38.6 28.2 23.0
319