Public administration of the agricultural sector of the Bulgarian economy in the conditions of implementation of European standards (1989-2007)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR OF THE BULGARIAN ECONOMY IN THE CONDITIONS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF EUROPEAN STANDARDS (1989-2007)

Abstract. Given the current state of European integration processes in Ukraine, a comprehensive study of the historical conditions of the reform processes in agriculture that took place in Bulgaria is urgent, which will help analyze the problems and determine the prospects for its development on the path to integration into the European economic space.

In this paper, a systematic approach is applied, which consists in a comprehensive study of the mechanism of state regulation of the development of the agrarian sector of the economy as a whole with the harmonized functioning of all its components. In addition, the methods used at the empirical and theoretical levels were applied, namely: comparative analysis - to study the methodological approaches, concepts, developments and proposals of leading domestic and foreign scientists on the features of state regulation of the development of the agrarian sector of the Bulgarian economy.

After more than ten years of participation in the European agricultural community, Bulgarian agriculture continued to seek its place in this country in the conditions of increasing competitive environment and dynamic conditions. According to the available statistics, it can be concluded that it has developed unbalanced, not taking into account the benefits that agriculture has in terms of natural and climatic conditions, namely soil and climate, and relying primarily on financial support from European funds. Thus, Bulgarian agriculture did not live up to the expectations of European investors who were emerging in the production of quality agricultural products, limiting the process of depopulation in the regions and ensuring employment (major or additional) of the Bulgarian rural population.

Keywords: agricultural sector, Bulgaria, agriculture, commodity producer, European Union, land reform.

In modem history, two areas of research, social history and agrarian history, have gained particular popularity. Therefore, it is not surprising that the current transformational processes taking place in the agrarian sector of the Bulgarian economy stimulate an increase in the interest of scholars in the problems associated with farming the Bulgarian lands. And this interest is legitimate because Bulgaria's agriculture accounts for a quarter of the total European agricultural commodity production. Without a detailed study of the peculiarities of the agrarian reforms of the Bulgarian village in the conditions of European integration, it is impossible to reproduce the objective picture of the society, to obtain true scientific information and to acquire historical experience suitable for use in the modern period.

The agrarian sector is the most important component of the economy of any country, the material basis of its wealth. At the same time, regardless of nationality, level of development, form of ownership, methods of organization of work, there is a close relationship between the development of the agrarian sector and the global processes of globalization of the economy, characterized by uncertainty and risks.

Specifying the essence of the globalization of the management and control system of the agrarian sector of the Bulgarian economy, it should be noted that globalization, the strengthening of interdependence in the world and the deepening of integration processes are among the general transformational processes that dominate the world and affect the process of transformation in the economy of Bulgaria. It is also logical and probable that the formation and deepening of European integration processes is carried out under the significant and tangible influence of external factors of a political nature. Therefore, the gradual transition of Bulgarian agrarian sector to the path of integration with the EU is a kind of reaction to the change of the country's foreign policy.

The political aspect of reforming the agrarian sector of the Bulgarian economy is a rather interesting problem and requires a detailed analysis and reflection. Therefore, it is necessary to bring this issue into a separate scientific work. In this article, an attempt is made to analyze the development of Bulgaria's agrarian sector on the path to EU integration.

With the beginning of the reform of the Bulgarian economy after the overthrow of the regime of T. Zhivkov, during the period of radical socio-economic transformations of the agrarian sector, all the Bulgarian governments (despite the proclamation by the state of a legal guarantee to enterprises of different ownership forms to create equal conditions for their management) have always been guided by the support of business development in rural areas the economy. They linked food security to the production of agricultural products based not on family business models (farms), as in almost all developed countries of the world, but on private multinational corporate structures. In the opinion of the Bulgarian political leadership, only large enterprises, controlling thousands of acres of land, were able to produce the necessary volumes of production in order to provide high productivity, attract investments and increase export potential of the country. It should be noted that many modern Bulgarian historians (H. Bashev, E. Maslou) consider such scheme of the agrarian transformation in the history of Bulgaria unsuccessful, since economic rationalism cannot be applied to agriculture as well as to industry and provokes an imbalance in the development of the economy [2, 7]. From this perspective the question of the place of agro-holdings in the process of transformation of the agrarian sector at the end of the XX - beginning of the ХХІ century seems rather relevant.

Determining their role (positive or negative) in rural development requires further historical exploration.

This problem is actually new in the field of research on Bulgarian historical science and has been studied by scientists since relatively recently. In particular, it is only partially covered in the scientific works of I. Penkov, related to the functioning of large agricultural holdings and the negative influence of the transformational processes on the countryside, as they inhibit the development of the agricultural way of life [8]. There are not many more works devoted to the activities of agricultural holdings but there are other well-known Bulgarian scholars. Among them one can distinguish scientific works by I. Tytyndghiev [11], I. Natan [6] and D. Vachkov [3, 4]. In addition, significant information on the state and trends of the development of individual agricultural holdings in Bulgaria is published in analytical reviews of various Internet resources.

Taking the above mentioned into account, the purpose of the article is to provide a comprehensive coverage of the history of the process of formation and activities of agricultural cooperatives and to determine their place and role in the agricultural sector at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century in the context of European integration processes of the Bulgarian society.

The end of the 20th - the beginning of the 21st century was the beginning of the formation of a new corporate agrarian system - the specific order of organization of large-scale agrarian production on the basis of concentration and cooperation of land, horizontal and vertical integration of production. A striking example of such an arrangement were Agrarian holdings and agro-cooperatives, which are often referred to as the leading operators of the agrarian market. Agrarian holdings - one of the varieties of holding companies - system of commercial organizations that include a "management company" holding controlling blocks of shares and subsidiaries. Agrarian holdings were formed for a certain purpose. This, as a rule, involves large land plots and reduces the cost of agricultural commodities. Both of these factors increase the value of the company and its capitalization. The effective work of the entire system, and not only the management company, is needed to achieve this goal [9, p. 22].

In May 1990 the Bulgarian government applied for membership as an associate member of the European Community. Following a nearly one-year negotiation process in November 1991, the initial agreement was initialed. It should be noted that the negotiations were extremely difficult because, with the participation of other candidate countries - the Czech Republic and Romania - involved in the negotiations, it was necessary to negotiate not only with the Commissioner-designate of the European Commission, but also with all 12 Member States. Communities. In fact, by the end of the summer of 1991, it was not possible to unblock the approval of draft Association Agreements because of the absence of "twelve" agreements on opening up import markets with candidate countries. The biggest disputes have arisen regarding the import of stone, textiles and agricultural products. President of the European Commission - Jacques Delors at the time challenged the statements of European politicians, who initially declared "sentimental speeches" about democracy and the free market, and then "closed the door to Bulgarian tomatoes and grapes" [7, p. 209].

Finally, after lengthy negotiations, on March 8, 1993, an association agreement was signed between the Republic of Bulgaria and the European Community. A European agreement that was subsequently concluded for an indefinite period; it was to enter into force on the first day of the new month after all had been ratified. Due to the delay in ratification of the agreement by the EU member states, the European agreement entered into force only on 1 February 1995. However, since March 1994, the trade part of the contract - the Transition Agreement - has been in operation.

In the Agreement, one of the central points was attributed to economic issues. In particular, among the goals and objectives of associate membership, the second place is "to support the development of trade and harmonious economic relations between the Parties in order to promote dynamic economic development and prosperity in Bulgaria" [8, p. 73]. Note that this wording did not cover all agricultural product groups. Concerned with the concern for protecting their producers, European politicians argued for restrictions on "vulnerable" products (agricultural products, natural stones, textiles) and, reluctantly, agreed to only partially open their markets to Bulgarian agricultural products [8, p. 74].

The third part of the Agreement deals with the movement of goods. It should be noted that the provisions relating to trade in agricultural and non-agricultural (industrial) goods were fundamentally different. With regard to manufactured goods, the Agreement provided for the introduction of a free trade area; the customs duties eliminated quantitative and other restrictions at the border between Bulgaria and the European Union. A completely different situation was with the sale of agricultural goods. Although the share of agricultural products in both exports and imports of Bulgaria was several times lower than the share of industrial products, however, the situation when the Association did not envisage widening of the free trade area caused special attention of both parties to this sphere. Given the well-developed system of protection of the agricultural market of the European Union, Brussels has gone solely to limited and selective liberalization in addressing this issue. In other words, liberalization covered only some agricultural products. In addition, it is only a matter of partial reduction, not elimination of trade barriers.

For some groups of goods manufactured in Bulgaria, the EU customs duty was reduced once in 1994, while other countries gradually increased their preferences for 3-5 years. Promoting market access to the EU was to reduce customs duties and so- called "agreed" allowances, which protected the common market from imports. However, the reduction in duties and surcharges concerned only a clearly defined quantity of goods. There were no export privileges in excess of certain quotas.

An additional problem that hindered the export of agricultural products from Bulgaria to the EU were the procedures to be followed in order to receive EU preferences. The licensing system involved a number of conditions that had to be fulfilled and therefore it was not profitable to seek preferences for small loads. Overall, only 27% of Bulgaria's agricultural exports to the EU were earmarked for a reduction in customs duties. Thus, facilitating access to the EU market was modest.

The liberalization of the access of European goods to the Bulgarian agricultural market has been much simpler. First, it was due to the lack of a developed system of protection against competitive imported goods from the countries of the united Europe. Since March 1, 1994, Bulgaria has reduced customs duties on 246 agricultural products, accounting for 24.8% of imports from EU countries. The reduction was 10%, most often from 35% to 25%, or from 25% to 15%. In early 1997, Bulgaria abolished the ban on imports of ethyl alcohol and non-aromatic vodka, as well as quantitative restrictions on imports of other alcoholic beverages from the EU. The food import restriction was abolished on 1 January 1999 [1, p.114].

At the same time, the European Agreement contained several so-called "safeguards", that is, provisions that allowed the parties to impose certain restrictions or new safeguards on imports in clearly defined situations.

A precautionary article concerning agricultural trade states: "... if, in view of the particular vulnerability of agricultural markets, the importation of the products of one of the Parties which is the subject of the concession ... would cause serious concern in the markets of the other Party, both Parties they will consult without delay to find an appropriate solution to the problem. Until a solution is found, the interested Party may apply the means it deems necessary" [7, p. 237].

Analyzing the consequences of Bulgaria's accession to the European Economic Area, it should be noted the high degree of complexity of this case. The fact is that the analysis was complicated by a number of factors, which, acting in parallel, make it virtually impossible to distinguish the real consequences of signing the European Agreement. First, it should be noted that the effects of liberalization in the context of obtaining associate membership were superimposed on the consequences of the transformation associated with the transition of the Bulgarian economy from a command-administrative to a market nature. Another factor complicating the assessment of the agreement since 1995 was the impact of innovations in world trade after the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations and the creation of the WTO.

Assessing the signing of the European agreement by Bulgaria, it is impossible to agree with the well-known Bulgarian researcher S. Grozdanov, that this fact should be recognized as a success of the Bulgarian state. International economic integration has been an objective historical phenomenon and is currently the most effective way of accelerating the economic development of European countries. The beginning of Bulgaria's integration with the European Union was the most important and at the same time the most effective external factor that contributed to, and most likely made possible, a rapid restructuring of the Bulgarian economy [2, p. 126].

The European Agreement, as the first and one of the most important treaties concluded by Bulgaria in the 1990s, served as a stabilizing factor for the development of the Bulgarian trade policy and economic system. By helping to stabilize economically, the agreement has simultaneously provided greater predictability of the economic system and a secure framework for both Bulgarian and foreign investors. The implementation of the European agreement has led to increased confidence in Bulgaria as a reliable trading partner. The concrete manifestation of such a positive influence was the improvement of the position of the Bulgarian state in the international financial markets, which allowed to successfully negotiate the reduction of external debt in the Paris and London clubs and to influence the inflow of foreign capital to Bulgaria [2, p. 128-129].

The above factors contributed to the fact that in 1997 Bulgaria was listed in 10 new investment markets with the highest degree of reliability. During 1990-1998, imports of investment capital to Bulgaria totaled $ 29 billion. United States [6, p. 171]. However, this fact was not closely related to Bulgarian agriculture. In our view, the provision of Article 45 of the Treaty, which allowed EU entrepreneurs to only lease land in Bulgaria [6, p. 173], led to a situation where the share of foreign investment in the agricultural sector was quite low. We would like to emphasize that some of the principles and conditions under which Bulgaria signed the Association Agreement were not helpful to her. This was largely the case with the agricultural sector. In particular, Bulgaria has pledged to abolish import quotas from the EU for 5 years. It should be borne in mind that in the early 1990s Bulgaria's agricultural sector was outdated and characterized by a low level of government subsidies. At the same time, agriculture in the EU Member States was much more efficient, with subsidies of 40-60% [6, p. 177]. In these circumstances, this step was clearly unjustified.

Even at the time of management and administrative methods of management, the countries of Western Europe were considered the main consumers of Bulgarian agricultural products. In discussing the terms of the European agreement, it was envisaged that Bulgaria would have a slight negative trade balance in the turnover of industrial goods. At the same time, it was believed that Bulgaria's trade balance would be balanced by agricultural products. However, this scenario was not implemented. The big surprise for Bulgarian economists and analysts was that, since the mid-1990s, trade in agribusiness has had a negative balance for Bulgaria. In particular, in 1996, the negative balance was 0.5 billion $ [9, p. 219]. During 19911997, the value of Bulgarian exports of agricultural products to the EU decreased by 7%, and exports almost doubled. The share of agricultural products in Bulgarian exports to the EU also decreased. In 1991, it was 17.4%, and in the seven years after the Association Agreement was signed it was only 7.6%. In addition, from 63% (1993) to 39% (1997) the share of Bulgarian agri-food products exported to the united Europe decreased due to the expansion of export supplies to the markets of the eastern neighbors [10, 91 p.]. All this happened against the backdrop of the decline of the Bulgarian agricultural market originating from EU countries [10, p. 91].

As such negative trends related to the deterioration of agricultural trade balance indicators were observed in other countries of Southern Europe, this leads to claim that one of the reasons for this is the European Agreement. The funds provided in the contract were insufficient and countries in southern Europe, including Bulgaria, were unable to maintain an additional surplus in foreign trade in agro-industrial products.

In these circumstances it is worth paying attention to the factors that led to unfavorable terms of the agreement for Bulgaria. First of all, let us note the weakness of Bulgaria's negotiating position. In the early 1990s, the country found itself in an extremely difficult economic situation and hoped for foreign support. It was the Bulgarian side that depended on reaching mutual agreements, establishing close economic and political contacts, and subsequently obtaining full membership in the Union. Negotiations with a much more economically strong partner forced the Bulgarian representatives to conclude that it was a kind of payment for the agreement.

The growing skepticism of Western European states regarding the assistance and potential accession of the countries of Southern and Central and Eastern Europe to the European Community has caused a situation where a number of Member States of the European Union have not made significant concessions to Bulgaria and its neighbors. Bulgarian diplomats realized that the deal did not partially meet their interests, but at the same time they realized that because of the EU's tough stance, no major concessions could be reached.

The situation, when the conditions of the agrarian sector were not quite favorable for Bulgaria in the European agreement, were taken into account by the Bulgarian side during the negotiations for full membership in the EU. Certainly, the level of financial support provided to Bulgarian peasants was lower than the level received by agricultural workers in the countries that joined the European Union during the previous enlargements. However, it was the Bulgarian farmers who, on the eve of Bulgaria's accession to the EU, were the largest European peoples, benefited the most from the 2007 enlargement [10, p. 117].

Ukraine has made a significant step towards EU integration. However, as the experience of neighboring countries shows, even acquiring the status of an associate member can cause some difficulties. In the case of Bulgaria, the conditions under which the merger was concluded were not entirely favorable to the agrarian sector. The high level of Ukrainian agriculture, which has not been fully disclosed, allows to maintain a stable balance of trade in agricultural products in foreign trade. It is crucial that the conditions under which Ukraine unites with the EU do not change the situation. In our view, one of the factors that could help this is the involvement and prevention of miscalculations by Bulgarian diplomats in the agricultural sector in the process of preparing and conducting the relevant negotiations.

Agrarian holdings arose under the influence of a number of economic incentives, although they were not a purely Bulgarian phenomenon, since they still exist in many post-socialist countries of Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics, and most of them in Russia and Kazakhstan - countries with significant agricultural land resources [5, p. 11]. The emergence of Agrarian holdings in post-socialist countries is due to imperfections and failures in the functioning of the economy, the lack of the necessary institutional and legal conditions for effective middle and small agribusiness, and imperfect state policy, especially the issues related to the formation of a full-fledged agricultural land market.

Under the influence of the processes of European integration and globalization in the agrarian sector of the Bulgarian economy, there have been some structural changes. The process of European integration envisaged the liberalization of foreign trade with the European Union (EU), as well as the harmonization of national legislation with the legislation of the EU. Bulgaria was supposed to subordinate its own agrarian food policy to the Common Agricultural Policy (EU). Also, the Bulgarian society faced a difficult task of approximation of national standards of production and consumption to the advanced EU standards.

In Bulgaria, one of the main economic prerequisites for the creation of holding companies has been the process of corporatization and privatization of large state enterprises and associations. Harmonization of Bulgarian legislation with the EU legislation provided for a whole range of measures that affected almost all sectors of the economy. In the agro-food sector, the most significant requirements for Bulgaria were the following: a ban on the cultivation of genetically modified organisms; restrictions (quotas) on the production of individual products (milk, sugar, isoglucose); bringing excise tax rates on tobacco products to a minimum level of the EU; the closure of livestock farms that do not comply with EU standards; eliminating barriers to trade in agro-food products; mandatory certification of production processes and products regarding quality and safety; compliance of agricultural products with EU standards.

When aligning Bulgarian legislation with EU legislation, Bulgaria had some difficulties complying with all the requirements.

Regarding the agrarian sector, Bulgaria, at the beginning of European integration, was characterized by a large number of small farms that bred farm animals for their own consumption or for sale on local markets. The conditions for the cultivation, slaughter and processing of these animals did not meet the EU standards for quality and safety of food products. The situation was better in poultry farming, represented by large modern enterprises [2, p. 132].

In the process of implementation of the Association Agreement, implementation of the program of preparation for joining the EU, a lot of work was done on the modernization of livestock farms, meat and dairy enterprises. In the meat and dairy industries there was a concentration of production with the closure of small enterprises that did not meet the established requirements. The cooperative movement, within which sales and service cooperatives were established, were also strengthened, as well as a mechanism for cooperation of farms with processing enterprises was established [8, p. 30]. The efforts of the Bulgarian government were aimed at the creation of specialized farms for fattening farm animals based on the existing ones, providing them with feed and the latest technology.

The EU program on modernization of cheese production called "EU Cheese Please" had a positive effect. With the help of the EU in Bulgaria, a cooperative with 300 pig farms (Muntenia) was created, in which the model of cooperation of households with a meat processing enterprise was implemented [7, p. 96].

In accordance with the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU, the creation of a holding company in the form of an open joint-stock company was envisaged by combining the authorized capital controlling blocks of shares in subsidiaries and other assets [7, p. 106]. The result was the the establishment of the bodies authorized to manage state property as well as state agencies of privatization.

In fact, over the period of 1989-1991, 35 holding companies and state-owned joint-stock companies were set up in Bulgaria, with the authorized capital of 305 cooperative agricultural companies [9, p. 124]. Among them there were BG "Agro", JSC "Lirex BG", "NIK", "Agro Bio Semen OOD", "InteragriBulgaria", AK "Ekofol", "Agrimatko" and others [9, p. 124].

It became rather apparent soon: one of the successful models of holding companies were agroholdings, which, in the reformed agriculture of independent Bulgaria, acted as business entities with the main objective to increase their own capital through profits, including the profits in the form of rent.

The first agroholding companies appeared in the early 1990's. An important prerequisite for their creation and successful activity was the accumulation of agricultural land. In December 1991, the President of Bulgaria J. Zhelev signed a decree "On urgent measures to accelerate the reform of the agrarian sector of the economy", which resulted in a significant acceleration of land operations. According to D. Vachkov, this decree became a turning point in the privatization of agricultural land and the restructuring of the economy [4, p. 283-284]. Giant holding companies rushed to take advantage of the situation and quickly began to accumulate agricultural land. As a result, social tensions have arisen in the countryside. In order to remove it, as well as to protect the peasants' right to private ownership of land parcels, in January 1991 a moratorium on the purchase and sale of land plots was introduced [3, p. 261]. In accordance with the approved Program of the Common Agricultural Policy, the EU temporarily prohibited the free sale of agricultural land, but the transfer of land shares to the inheritance and their redemption for public and public needs were allowed. It was supposed that the moratorium would operate for a short period before the settlement of the procedure for the realization of the rights of citizens and legal entities on the land parcels in the new Land Code of Bulgaria by 1990 [3, p. 79].

The incompleteness of institutional transformations in the agrarian sector has led to the creation of mechanisms for shadow control over the distribution of agricultural land, which resulted in the emergence of a shadow land market. A whole system of circumvention of the moratorium has been developed: the conclusion of a preliminary contract of sale with the condition that it fully comes into force after the moratorium expires; execution of a power of attorney with the right to dispose of land and conclusion of the lease with the subsequent right of priority redemption [3, p. 219].

It should be noted that many agro-holding companies that were created at that time quickly disappeared from the economic arena, and many companies and businessmen who poured their capital into agribusiness quickly "abandoned" it through a non-fundamentalist motive (obtaining assets of agrarian enterprises to repay debts, hoping to buy cheap and sell for a higher price, expecting a quick return at any price, etc.). Therefore, the process of capitalization of agriculture in the direction of injection of capital from other spheres of the economy at an initial stage - approximately 1993-1995 - was carried out often chaotically, not purposefully, including the process of reselling assets by some business groups to others. However, at the end of this period, the concentration of agribusiness began to be realized on certain rather relief-based principles [8, p. 180].

Until 1996, transactions with land shares, concentration of land and its illicit purchase and sale gained enormous proportions, and therefore the People's Assembly of Bulgaria in February 1996 was forced to adopt the Law "On Amendments to the Land Code", which invalidated the sale-purchase agreement. On July 24, 2006, the President of Bulgaria Georgy Pirvanov signed the Decree No. 644/2006 "On Certain Issues of Organizational and Legal Provision of the Rights of Owners of Land Plots", which was the logical continuation of the law of the Bulgarian National Assembly [7, p. 136].

The reaction of the state leadership initially slowed down illegal transactions with land, and the activity of land market operators somewhat declined. However, since no real action was taken on legislative initiatives, the land turnover schemes continued to be practiced, but with a partial modification. It should be noted that since 1996, the legal procedure for the activities of holdings began to be determined by the law of the NBU No. 3528-IV "On Agro-Food Companies" adopted on March 15, according to which the holding companies were divided into two types: holding companies and state holding companies [5, p. 122].

Since 1996, the whole scheme of the creation of agrarian holdings has been developed, which consisted of several stages. At the first stage, investment was made in domestic, and often foreign, capital in the processing industry, which provided much faster turnover and payback. In particular, it concerned oilseed, flour-grinding, baking, sugar, meat and dairy industries. The next stage of investment was the sale of products through the development of logistics and its own trading network. With the accumulation of necessary financial resources, the third stage created its own © Mariia Georgieva, 2020 agricultural production through the lease of land and partly property shares and the purchase of the necessary resources, first of all, modem technology [2, p. 147].

There was another, more simple way of creating agrarian holdings - the development of agribusiness companies, whose main activities were not related to the agrarian sector. An example of such agrarian holdings was the subsidiary "Sintal Agriculture" [7, p. 146], which included 22 agricultural enterprises with different legal statuses, with a total area of about 100 thousand hectares of agricultural land, including over 90 thousand hectares of arable land, and in 2010, the branches contained 6 thousand cows, 25 thousand heads of pigs, 500 thousand broilers, 1 million heads of adult chickens, processing power of the company represented by the agro-company "Alfa Vita" [7, p. 146].

The company began to conduct innovations cooperating with six research institutes in Bulgaria. Thus, at its own breeding farm, "Sintal Agriculture" started the cultivation of the Holstein and Simmental breeds of cows, and used the most modern crosses in the poultry industry: the Hein-Lyntha Bovand-Goldline chicken crosses, the Cobb-500 broiler crosses and the Gibro [8, p. 27]. By 1998 the process of creating large holdings with 50-100 thousand hectares of land was carried out at a gigantic pace [8, p. 27]. The emerging "agrarian lobby" relied on the rapid abolition of the moratorium and the legalization of ownership of captured land masses, however, a financial crisis began in 1998 and brought considerable material losses.

In this situation, the extension of the moratorium on land sales has caused an increase in the cost of retaining land and paying rent not only for cultivated land, but also for unprocessed land. The previously formed land bank of 100 thousand hectares annually demanded the seizure of several million dollars to pay rent. In the crisis, when expectations for a quick market opening by lobbying for lifting the moratorium failed, owners and tenants of large land masses began to look for ways to minimize losses. But if by 1998, investors were willing to pay millions for land lease, hoping for a quick opening of the land market, then in the beginning of the crisis they began to sell parts of the controlled land. Some share of land assets was sold cheaper than the price at which they were bought on the eve of the crisis, and the growth of land banks partially ceased. According to the results of open interviews with owners of "crisis agrarian holdings", the area of the agricultural land under their control in 1999 decreased by 25% - to 60% [2, p. 151].

At the same time, the financial crisis contributed to the regrouping of strategic investors who diverted their interests into the agro-food sector, which at that time was in a better position than other sectors of the economy. Moreover, the aggravation of the global food crisis and the growth of world food prices, as well as the untapped potential of Bulgarian agriculture, has consolidated its attractiveness for "great capital." In 1998-2007, new operators in the agrarian sector began to form their land banks by acquiring weaker "agrarian holdings", especially those that concentrated their land not only on production but also on possible resale after the moratorium was lifted. It was a signal for other large operators of the agrarian sector to strengthen their positions in the land market.

In 2007, 40 most powerful holding structures controlled 4.5 million hectares of land, representing 13% of the cultivated agricultural land in the country [7, p. 130131]. The largest agrarian holdings (from 400 to 600 thousand hectares in use) have their production concentrated in the most suitable regions - Shumen, Sofia, Russe, Pleven and Stara Zagora; from 200 to 400 thousand hectares - in the Dobrich [7, p. 140].

It is worth mentioning one of the largest agrarian holdings of this period - "Loviko AD".

After acquiring several large agricultural companies at once, including "Riz" and "Dakor Agro Holding", the land bank of the "Loviko AD" holding exceeded 500 thousand hectares, making it the largest in Southeast Europe by the number of cultivated land. Moreover, these acquisitions allowed the holding to take serious positions in the country for the production of sugar [7, p. 141].

On October 5, 2006 Zenit became part of Bulgar landfarming. Now the company owns 18 meat factories, two processing plants, six seed plants, six sugar factories, three elevators with a capacity of 645 thousand tons of one-time storage, four grain storage facilities and 110 horizontal storage facilities [2, p. 168].

Another large agrarian holdings, one of the largest operators on the grain and vegetable market, Land Grabbing, acquired controlling stakes in two agricultural companies in the Vidin and Pleven regions in 2006. The total area of these agricultural enterprises exceeded 19 thousand hectares. In 2006, the company also entered the sugar market by purchasing Encelco and the Vegetable Soyuz BG- Zelenchutsy, one of the largest producers of this product in the country. Besides the "vegetable" capacities, the land bank of the holding has replenished more than 120 thousand hectares.

The "Holding Varna" AD, the owner of which was M. Mitev, became a powerful agrarian holding at the end of the first decade. In 2005, the holding increased net profits by 3.9% to $149,978 million, while revenue was up by 66.1% to $268,308 million [2, p. 169].

The process of creating new agrarian holdings continued to be quite active in 2007. In the middle of this year, a group of companies "HIMIMPORT" AD and a group "CKB Groups" EAD on the basis of agricultural assets of the region of Dobrudja created an agrarian holding with a land bank of 75 thousand hectares [2, p. 172].

Analyzing the production direction of agrarian holdings, it should be noted that in the majority of cases their activity was directed at the production of grain and vegetable crops, as well as at the production of raw materials for own processing industries (milk, cattle meat, sheep, poultry, etc.).

A somewhat diverse approach to the development of the rural areas in which they conducted their business, developed among agrarian holding companies. Very few of them began to take care of the population of the region, developing rural infrastructure and improving the well-being of Bulgarian villagers. Others only partially helped the Bulgarian peasants in building their living space, but this assistance was small compared to their capabilities. And most of the large corporations were agrarian holdings, which generally abandoned social infrastructure and acted on the basis of profit maximization (they were not interested in the social sphere of the Bulgarian village, since their main labor force was temporarily (or seasonally) hired workers who carried out agrotechnical operations of the enterprise through moving from one branch to another.

Thus, from the beginning of this century, the study of the state and tendencies of the development of agriculture in Bulgaria, there are several important conclusions:

- despite the fact that it starts from too low a starting position after a long and exhausting agrarian reform, there is a process of gradual recovery.

- the common agricultural policy will continue to be a key driver of its sustainable development, but at the same time it is necessary to formulate and implement adequate national policies to complement and further develop European measures and mechanisms.

- a more balanced development should be sought between the various subsectors, using most of the various soils, the country's climatic conditions, and the experience and traditions it has had recently, such as the production of vegetables and fruits.

- there is a need to diversify agricultural production and to seek new directions for development, such as the expansion of organic production, the production of high quality food and high value added products. Thus, the sector will be able to compete at regional and European levels.

The scale will promote employment, create the conditions for a more active rural area and increase its contribution to the national economy.

bulgarian agrarian sector reforming integration

List of sources and literature:

1. Анастасова М. Миграционните процеси на населението в Р. България при прехода към пазарна икономика / М. Анастасова. - София: Издателство на институт по икономика на селското стопанство, 2015.- 830 с.

2. Башев Х. Ефекти от прилагане на европейски политики вїрху земеделските стопанства в Р. България / Х. Башев. - София: ИАИ, 2018. - 378 с.

3. Вачков Д. Българският външен дълг: Банкрутът на комунистическата икономика / Д. Вачков. - София: Институт за изследване на близкото минало, 2009. - 456 с.

4. Вачков Д. НРБ от началото до края / Д. Вачков.- София: Институт за изследване на близкото минало, 2011. - 480 с.

5. Иванов Б. Устойчивост в земеделието / Б. Иванов. - София: Авангард Прима, 2009. - 230 с.

6. Натан И. Икономика на България / И. Натан. - София: Наука и изкуство, 2013. - 171 с.

7. Маслоу Е. Мотивация и личност / Е. Маслоу. - София: Кибея, 2001. - 296 с.

8. Пенков И. Икономическа география на България / И. Пенков. - София: Наука и изкуство, 2008. - 422 с.

9. Русчева Д. Продоволствените ресурси на България при осъществяване на Общата селскостопанска политика на ЕС / Д. Русчева. - София: Унив. изд. "Св. Климент Охридски", 2010. - 151 с.

10. Тютюнджиев И. Стопанска история на България / И. Тютютнджиев. - София: Ровита, 2011. - 204 с.

Марія Георгієва, кандидат історичних наук, доцент

Національний транспортний університет, Київ, Україна

ДЕРЖАВНЕ УПРАВЛІННЯ АГРАРНИМ СЕКТОРОМ ЕКОНОМІКИ БОЛГАРІЇ В УМОВАХ ВПРОВАДЖЕННЯ ЄВРОПЕЙСЬКИХ СТАНДАРТІВ (1989-2007)

Анотація. У статті вивчено стан сільського господарства Болгарії в євроінтеграційних та глобалізаційних умовах та окреслено шляхи реформування аграрного сектору економіки Болгарії у відповідності до вимог та стандартів європейського економічного простору. Проаналізовано положення європейської співпраці з Болгарією в аграрному товаровиробництві та основні тенденції цього спрівробітництва, які відображають умови щодо розвитку болгарської сільськогосподарської сфери. Особливу увагу приділено аналізу позитивних та негативних наслідків для сільського господарства Болгарії від її європейської економічної інтеграції. Розглянуто перспективи євроінтеграції для аграрної сфери економіки Болгарії.

Размещено на Allbest.ru