2120 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS TO KEEP LAYING HENSnot invest in enriched cages or alternative systems, but will choose to retire or leave the sectorinstead.A1.4.2.1. Main packersMunakunta is the dominant packer in Finland and is a producer co-operative. This position in themarket was consolidated in 2001 with the purchase of A-Muna Oy, a large private packer previouslyowned by a multiple retailer. Munakunta accounts for just over half (55% in 2003) of all eggs packed.Box A1.11: Profile of MunakuntaMunakunta is the largest egg packer in Finland accounting for more than half of all eggs packedOwnership: Munakunta is a producer co-operativeSubsidiary: Munakunta owns 65% of ScaneggTurnover: €46.9 million in 2003 (this figure is for the Group as a whole and includes Munakunta’sshare of Scanegg). Turnover for the shell egg business was €41.2 million in 2003Profit: €1 millionEmployment: 79 staff (Munakunta Grouop, but not including Scanegg)Main markets: in volume terms, domestic 71%, shell egg exports 14%, 15% for processing,mainly domesticA1.4.2.2. Production (packer) concentrationThe nature of egg production in Finland is fragmented with, according to the key players spoken to,too many producers and too many packers leading to excessive competition. The contract system isnot as developed as it could be resulting in some marketing problems. Prior to joining the EU theFinnish government took responsibility for exporting the often significant surplus (with exportsubsidy). On accession this assistance was phased out and the resulting domestic surplus caused asevere downward price adjustment. A lot of egg producers were forced out of business at this time,although the government was able to provide support for restructuring under temporary accessionagreements.The packing sector of the industry is dominated by Munakunta and there is a big difference in scaleseparating this company from the rest of the industry. Table A1.21 presents the main egg packers inFinland.Table A1.21: Main egg packers in FinlandRank Company Output 20031 Munakunta 32.7 million kg, 523.0 million eggs2-6 Munakuutoset (5 packers who compete domestically,11.7 million kg, 187.2 million eggsbut co-operate in export markets)7 Narpes egg packery 2.0 million kg, 32.0 million eggs (estimates)8 Ōsterbotten egg centrallag 1.8 million kg, 28.8 million eggsTotal production59 million kg, 944 million eggs148
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS TO KEEP LAYING HENSBased on the above, the 4-firm concentration ratio for Finland in 2003 was 67.3% 66 and the 8-firmconcentration ratio 81.7%. The packing industry is now less concentrated than it was prior toaccession when the Narpes egg packery did not exist, neither did two companies packing between1.5 and 1.8 million kg, nor one packing just under 1.0 million kg. A range of smaller packingcompanies were also founded after accession. Producers therefore now have a greater range ofpacking stations to send eggs to.A1.4.2.3. Main production systemsThe dominant system in Finland is the traditional cage (accounting for 86% of laying hens). The mainalternative system in use is deep litter which accounts for just over 10% of laying hens. A further 4%of laying hens are kept in organic systems 67 . There are just six producers using enriched cages, thelargest of which has just under 10,000 laying hens. Some producers have invested in what are knownas ‘enrichable’ cages. These are currently operated as a traditional cages, but the removal ofpartitions and addition of cage furniture will make the cage comply with Directive 1999/74/EC.Whilst production costs are said to be higher than production using traditional cages, they are not ashigh as expected using fully enriched cages and it is felt by some players in the industry that manyproducers will implement the Directive over time in this manner.All systems in use in Finland follow the EU legislation with no national modifications. Although not asystem issue, beak-trimming is not permitted in Finland.Figure A1.16 shows the evolution of laying hens kept by system from 1994 to 2002. Data are fromthe Agricultural Situation in the Community. Data on alternative systems is only available from 1996and data for caged production in 2002 is not yet available from this source. The Figure shows thatwhilst production in deep litter systems is increasing, it is fairly insignificant in comparison toproduction from traditional cages. The steep decline in laying hen numbers between 1996 and 1997reflects accession to the EU.66 Under the assumption that production from Munakuutoset is evenly split between the 5 companies.67 Organic production cannot be caged and thus these hens are in deep litter systems with a reduced stocking density of 5 rather than 9birds per m 2 , outdoor access and a limit of 3,000 birds per barn.149
Page 1:
Study on thesocio-economic implicat
Page 4 and 5:
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109: THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF
Page 157: THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF
Page 201 and 202: APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSA1.
Page 203 and 204: APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSwhi
Page 205 and 206: APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS3.0
Page 207 and 208: APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSA1.
Page 209 and 210:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSTab
Page 211 and 212:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS765
Page 213 and 214:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS80%
Page 215 and 216:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSA1.
Page 217 and 218:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSwhe
Page 219 and 220:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSThe
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS60%
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSAll
Page 235 and 236:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS60,
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSsta
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSBox
Page 278 and 279:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSAt
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303:
Page 306 and 307:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSAlt
Page 308 and 309:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSpro
Page 310 and 311:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSCag
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSwel
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS St
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSupw
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSsup
Page 337 and 338:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTS4,5
Page 339 and 340:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSWhi
Page 341 and 342:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSApp
Page 343 and 344:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSBot
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSAnn
Page 351 and 352:
APPENDIX 1: MEMBER STATE REPORTSYEA
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361:
Page 364 and 365:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESA2.3.2.
Page 366 and 367:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESTable A2
Page 368 and 369:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESA2.3.2.2
Page 370 and 371:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESA2.3.3.
Page 373 and 374:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESA2.4. Un
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESPrior to
Page 379 and 380:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIES35030025
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESStandard
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESUnder th
Page 389 and 390:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIES2303.33.
Page 391 and 392:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIES70605040
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIEStwo-thir
Page 397 and 398:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIES(85% of
Page 399:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESAnnex A:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESevaluate
Page 412 and 413:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESsmaller
Page 414 and 415:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESInputsFe
Page 416 and 417:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESN Qc N Q
Page 418 and 419:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIES(10*) EQ
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
Page 424 and 425:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESFor a ch
Page 426 and 427:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESHoloway,
Page 428 and 429:
APPENDIX 2: THIRD COUNTRIESA3.6. Se
show all

2120 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?