Do official farm statistics tell us much about the real farm structure in Germany?

Transcription

1 Do official farm statistics tell us much about the real farm structure in Germany? Thünen Institute of Farm Economics, Braunschweig, Germany Ekaterina Zavyalova, Bernhard Forstner Slide 17 th 0 meeting Zavyalova, of Network Forstner for Farm Level-Analysis

2 Outline 1. Introduction 2. Farm Structures in Germany 3. Pilot Study in Lower Saxony 4. Conclusions Slide 1

3 Farm and enterprise structure in German agriculture Rather complex structure due to: Holding fragmentation Vertical and horizontal cooperation Shareholding Various reasons: Taxation regulations Agricultural subsidy regulations Environmental legal requirements Limitation of liability Main sources of information: Agricultural Structure Survey (ASS) = Farm Structure Survey Administrative data Reliability? Slide 2

4 Farm structure according to official statistics ASS 2013 results: holdings in total 90% family farms Problem practically no / biased coverage of: Direct marketing of agricultural products Holiday accomodation (agrotourism, farmstay etc.) Renewable energy production Agricultural services (e.g. contracting) Etc. Slide 3

5 Practical example 1: Family farm with alternative income sources Home Our farm Appartements Animals Leisure Nature Excursions Agriculture Direct Marketing Location Contact us Johann Huber + agricultural services Source: Forstner (2014) Slide 4

6 Agricultural taxation and agricultural statistics coverage Separate taxation norms for agricultural and commercial production Advantages of income from agriculture and forestry : Flat rate for value-added tax (VAT) Privileged construction of farm buildings Taxation of alternative income sources: Small scope income from agriculture and forestry Large scope income from trade or business Official statistics coverage: income from agriculture coverage income from trade or business no coverage Problem: agricultural and commercial holdings often co-exist within one family Coverage? Slide 5

7 Agricultural and commercial livestock production Commercial production disadvantages in taxation, loss of privileges of agriculture Margin between agricultural and commercial production: Acreage-related stocking density The larger the acreage the smaller the allowed relative stocking density Adjustment strategies: Holding fragmentation Cooperation with a holding with no livestock Consequence complex farm structure Slide 6

8 Allowed stocking density (LU / ha UAA) Acreage-related stocking density Acreage-related stocking density dairy cow = 1 LU breeding sow = 0.33 LU Acreage (in ha UAA) 20 ha 20 ha 20 ha 20 ha 20 ha 1000 LU 100 ha 540 LU Slide 7

9 Stocking density in Germany (2010) dairy cow = 1 GLU fattening pig = 0.12 GLU 320 laying hen = 1 GLU 100 broiler chickens = GLU GLU / ha UAA Source: Agricultural Atlas by Thünen Institute URL: Map.htm?LP=1 Slide 8

10 Practice example 2: Fragmented agricultural family holding (2) civil law partnership (husband + wife) (1) the original holding single enterprise (husband) (3) 51a Validation Law cooperation (4) single enterprise (son) breeding piglet rearing prefattening fattening fattening fattening field crop production field crop production field crop production biogas production (GmbH & Co KG) piglet production pig fattening field crop production Slide 9

11 2 Farm structure in Germany Slide 10

12 Overview Structural change as everywhere else: Main reason: technical progress Declining number of holdings: ca. 2.4% per annum Increasing holding size Animal production more distinct decline tendency: Piglet producers: ca. 8.3% per annum Reason: Regulation on the protection and keeping of production animals obligatory group keeping high investments required Fattening farms: ca. 2% per annum Slide 11

13 Structures in Southern, Western and Eastern Germany Pronounced difference in farm size distribution (in ha) between South and East : South : 78% operate less than 50 ha Small farms ca. 40% of the total UAA Large farms (500 ha and over) 13% of the total UAA East : 53% operate less than 50 ha Small farms ca. 3% of the total UAA Large farms (500 ha and over) 68% of the total UAA Slide 12

14 % Structures in Southern, Western and Eastern Germany % 60 % of total holding number 50 % of total UAA Acreage (in ha UAA) Acreage (in ha UAA) South East South East Slide 13

15 Farm development through alternative income sources Ca. 1/3 of all farms runs alternative income sources (2013) Half of them produce renewable energy Reason subsidies for renewable energy production (German renewable energy act EEG) renewable energy production, 16.7% with alternative income sources; 33,3% without using alternative income sources, 67.0% But: statistics cover only the agricultural part A study in Bavaria shows the percentage of holdings with alternative income sources: Official statistics: 38.5% (2010) Auto-survey: 61.1% Source: destatis (ASS 2013), own calculations Slide 14

16 Preliminary conclusions Ability of official statistics to reflect the holding structure is severely limited Impact on structure and income analyses limited explanatory value The difference between the real structure and statistics most pronounced in regions with high livestock density Taxation regulation play the most important role Especially the LU-margins Slide 15

17 3 Pilot Study in Lower Saxony Slide 16

18 Pilot study (2014) The issues: How often can combinations of agricultural and commercial holdings within an economic unity be found in reality? Which factors are significant for the development of complex farm and enterprise structures? Methodology: Analysis of 3 districts with different production profiles: Predominantly crop production (Peine) Mixed crop + livestock production (Nienburg) Intensive livestock production (Vechta) Guided interviews with experts Comparison of own results and statistical data Slide 17

19 Informative value of statistical data Pilot study in Lower Saxony: High proportion of agricultural holdings with belonging commercial holdings Big regional differences due to different production profiles sole agricultural holding one agricultural holding + at least one commercial holding (diversification) several agricultural holdings (incl. commercial livestock prodution) crop production (Peine) mixed production (Nienburg) several agricultural holdings + at least one commercial holding (diversification) 5 12 intensive livestock production (Vechta) 44 Source: Meyer(2014) (based on expert interviews) % of holdings Slide 18

20 Pilot study in Lower Saxony % of holdings with alternative income sources intensive livestock production (Vechta) mixed production (Nienburg) 19 Survey results 69 crop production (Peine) Agricultural Census 2010 results Source: Meyer (2014) % of holdings The expert assess the proportion of holdings with alternative income sources in Nienburg and Vechta much higher than the official statistics. Slide 19

21 Study results No claim to be representative But the results provide indications of following issues: Considerable proportion of holdings comprises several holdings Especially in regions with intensive livestock production The owners involved are often family members Fragmentation of holdings adjustment strategy due to taxation regulations Strong influence of renewable energy production on structural development in agriculture Slide 20

22 4 Conclusions Slide 21

23 Conclusions Generally dramatic changes in agricultural holdings in the last decades Many family farms feature complex structure Farms increase in size and often hire external workforce New enterprise and employment models Official statistics cannot keep pace with the development New approach in data collection and display is necessary Slide 22

24 Thank you for your attention! Thünen Institute for farm economics Slide 23