Final Report Summary - DIVTOB (Diversification for Tobacco Growing Regions in the Southern European Union)
Tobacco cultivation in Europe was supported by a common market organisation (CMO) for the past forty years. However, the way this support was organised resulted in the EU overpaying three and a half times the commercial crop value for its cultivation, according to year 2000 data. It was thus decided to develop a sustainable policy approach for tobacco cultivation, based on the assessment of economical, social and environmental parameters. The proposed policy relied on a step-wise decoupling of the existing tobacco premium, along with a phasing out of the relevant fund and with the setting up of a financial envelope for restructuring tobacco producing areas. Future support for the producers would be included in the single farm payment scheme.
The DIVTOB project aimed to support this new policy development through the search for sustainable alternative cultivations for tobacco growers. Its overall objective was to address the future livelihood problem of the members of family tobacco farms through the provision of innovative employment, and hence income, sources.
A toolbox was developed for that purpose, which was addressed to national and European administrations and policy makers and which identified and characterised those sustainable alternatives which were suitable for the different regions. Apart from the provision of the basis to facilitate decisions regarding the tobacco farmers, DIVTOB aimed to quantify in terms of area, working hours and income the magnitude of the necessary diversification efforts so as to properly define sustainable future alternatives. The target countries were primarily Italy, Greece and Spain, accounting together for 87 % of the total tobacco production in the project beginning, with Portugal being also affected.
The main difficulty that needed to be overcome was the development of an appropriate innovative approach to reduce the socio-economic impact of the scheduled reform on the farmers families. The investigated production alternatives were the following:
1. off-farm activities, which were though not available in most regions;
2. aromatic and medical plants, which could form a solution in very specific areas and for a limited number of farms;
3. energy plants and renewable energy applications, which proved insufficient for income and job maintenance;
4. rural tourism, which could not be a large scale solution since most of the regions were already developed;
5. aquaculture, which could become a feasible solution but was out of the experience range of the majority of the farmers;
6. horticulture and fruit production;
7. new crops;
8. continuation of tobacco crops cultivation in regions with good market quality;
9. animal farming.
Given the average farm area, most farmers should choose an alternative able to provide high income per agriculture area in order to survive. Traditional animal products could provide a viable solution in some cases. Granivorous livestock farming could also potentially result in increased farm incomes; however, the high number of farms that might select this alternative would cause a market imbalance affecting the entire sector. As a result any sector analysis, if required, should be performed on a national level. Similar analyses should moreover be performed for other intense productions, e.g. horticulture, if selected by numerous producers.
Feasible alternatives, which could be applied by many farmers and executed by family farms with less than 15 ha of farm land, were defined, summarised and compared. The scenarios were based on the assumptions that 10 000 farmers would be substituting 3 ha of tobacco each, that the farmers were members of a producer organisation and that investments would be necessary both on farm and organisation level. The viable alternatives for small farms included vegetable and fruits production, hydroponic production, aquaculture and introduction of new crops, such as pomegranate or stevia. The most cost effective among these options was a combination of vegetable production, either organic or conventional, along with stevia rebaudiana cultivation. The majority of the examined solutions appeared to have a limited local importance, but not a big impact on a larger number of farms. None of them though could be immediately applied.
The DIVTOP project had the following overall conclusions:
1. Diversification was a very delicate undertaking in most regions, since it mainly influenced family farms and most farmers were not prepared for such a reform.
2. An available alternative which could be directly implemented did not exist and further research was required in that field.
3. All the examined scenarios resulted in labour reduction, with the exception of greenhouse production.
4. The diversification alternatives could mobilise rural development and provide new jobs opportunities in the secondary and tertiary sector; however, investments in new production chains, research and innovation were necessary.
The execution of DIVTOP resulted in several proposals for further research and studies in the tobacco sector. Among those proposals was a study on the mechanisation of tobacco production, in order to improve the product economic feasibility, a project to improve the information of farmers over tobacco policy and alternative options and, finally, projects for the technology transfer of the most feasible among the various diversification solutions.
The DIVTOB project aimed to support this new policy development through the search for sustainable alternative cultivations for tobacco growers. Its overall objective was to address the future livelihood problem of the members of family tobacco farms through the provision of innovative employment, and hence income, sources.
A toolbox was developed for that purpose, which was addressed to national and European administrations and policy makers and which identified and characterised those sustainable alternatives which were suitable for the different regions. Apart from the provision of the basis to facilitate decisions regarding the tobacco farmers, DIVTOB aimed to quantify in terms of area, working hours and income the magnitude of the necessary diversification efforts so as to properly define sustainable future alternatives. The target countries were primarily Italy, Greece and Spain, accounting together for 87 % of the total tobacco production in the project beginning, with Portugal being also affected.
The main difficulty that needed to be overcome was the development of an appropriate innovative approach to reduce the socio-economic impact of the scheduled reform on the farmers families. The investigated production alternatives were the following:
1. off-farm activities, which were though not available in most regions;
2. aromatic and medical plants, which could form a solution in very specific areas and for a limited number of farms;
3. energy plants and renewable energy applications, which proved insufficient for income and job maintenance;
4. rural tourism, which could not be a large scale solution since most of the regions were already developed;
5. aquaculture, which could become a feasible solution but was out of the experience range of the majority of the farmers;
6. horticulture and fruit production;
7. new crops;
8. continuation of tobacco crops cultivation in regions with good market quality;
9. animal farming.
Given the average farm area, most farmers should choose an alternative able to provide high income per agriculture area in order to survive. Traditional animal products could provide a viable solution in some cases. Granivorous livestock farming could also potentially result in increased farm incomes; however, the high number of farms that might select this alternative would cause a market imbalance affecting the entire sector. As a result any sector analysis, if required, should be performed on a national level. Similar analyses should moreover be performed for other intense productions, e.g. horticulture, if selected by numerous producers.
Feasible alternatives, which could be applied by many farmers and executed by family farms with less than 15 ha of farm land, were defined, summarised and compared. The scenarios were based on the assumptions that 10 000 farmers would be substituting 3 ha of tobacco each, that the farmers were members of a producer organisation and that investments would be necessary both on farm and organisation level. The viable alternatives for small farms included vegetable and fruits production, hydroponic production, aquaculture and introduction of new crops, such as pomegranate or stevia. The most cost effective among these options was a combination of vegetable production, either organic or conventional, along with stevia rebaudiana cultivation. The majority of the examined solutions appeared to have a limited local importance, but not a big impact on a larger number of farms. None of them though could be immediately applied.
The DIVTOP project had the following overall conclusions:
1. Diversification was a very delicate undertaking in most regions, since it mainly influenced family farms and most farmers were not prepared for such a reform.
2. An available alternative which could be directly implemented did not exist and further research was required in that field.
3. All the examined scenarios resulted in labour reduction, with the exception of greenhouse production.
4. The diversification alternatives could mobilise rural development and provide new jobs opportunities in the secondary and tertiary sector; however, investments in new production chains, research and innovation were necessary.
The execution of DIVTOP resulted in several proposals for further research and studies in the tobacco sector. Among those proposals was a study on the mechanisation of tobacco production, in order to improve the product economic feasibility, a project to improve the information of farmers over tobacco policy and alternative options and, finally, projects for the technology transfer of the most feasible among the various diversification solutions.
