2120 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS TO KEEP LAYING HENS6. The socio-economic impact of Directive 1999/74/EC6.1. Implementation to dateImplementation of the ban on unenriched cages in line with Chapter II, Art. 5.2 of Directive 1999/74across the EU-15 has not been uniform with some countries, notably Germany and Austria,introducing national cage bans which will come into effect from 2007 and 2009 respectively.Sweden is a special case within the EU. National legislation in this area has been driven from theanimal welfare point of view for some time and the government believes that both consumers andproducers are in agreement that animal welfare is important and worth paying for. Swedenannounced in 1988 that caged egg production would be banned with effect from 1998. However, inthe meantime Sweden joined the EU and enriched cages were ultimately permitted with a ban on thetraditional cage from January 2003. Implementation in Sweden is nearly complete, although sometraditional caged producers did take the Swedish government to court on the grounds that it hadfailed to notify Brussels of the legislation correctly. Whilst this legal challenge was successful, thegovernment then notified Brussels correctly and, following the decision by the third and fourthlargest retailers in Sweden to stop stocking eggs from the traditional cage system by the end of2004 19 and the strengthening of the inspection system, it is expected that all production in traditionalcages will have ceased by the beginning of 2005. The outcome from this is that Sweden has adoptedthe ban on unenriched cages in line with Chapter II, Art.5.2 of some years in advance of the rest ofthe EU and thus provides a good illustration of what might happen in the wider EU once theprohibition on production in unenriched cage systems is applied from 1 January 2012.6.2. Expected implementationWith the notable exception of Sweden, for the reasons outlined above, in most Member States therehas been very little progress made on the introduction of enriched cages. This is primarily for fourreasons:Producers are/have been awaiting the outcome of the review of the regime by the Commissionin 2005.Producers are/have been awaiting the outcome of national discussions on the future of policy(Germany, Belgium, Austria).Producers in a number of Member States feel that they will not be able to recover the one offcapital investment that is likely to arise from the introduction of enriched cages because themarket will not differentiate this product from traditional caged production. There are alsoconcerns about the on-going impact on variable costs.19 The top two retailers had already taken this decision. Between them these four retailers account for 98-99% of the Swedish retailmarket.81