DISEÑO DEL BLOQUE CORDIC EN HARDWARE

The strategic priorities and targets proposed in this study are by nature similar to those identified in the respective agricultural policy strategic documents of SEE countries while emphasising specific aspect and approaches considered essential for effective policymaking. In these strategic documents

governments recognize the importance of development orientation through the identified challenges and policy objectives, but the practical implementation of these objectives remains limited.

The development of the agricultural sector and rural areas requires consistent commitment and efforts, as well as capital, both financial and human, in the form of well-trained and dedicated experts who seek and share solutions, coordinate and execute the policy measures. The responsibility for this lies on the one hand with the private sector, with its financial institutions and agro-food organizations, and on the other with public decision makers to establish the appropriate legal and institutional environment as well as support structures.

Development oriented policymaking relies on solid long term strategic planning, identifies tailored policy solutions, endeavours to optimise the mix of policy measures and promotes private-public partnerships. It is thus recommended that this approach be increasingly introduced in agricultural and rural development policymaking in the SEE countries to address the enormous challenges lying ahead. This approach provides the tools for developing an agricultural sector capable of using the natural resources in a sustainable manner and releasing the potential for producing competitive high quality products as well as fostering balanced rural economic development in the region.

EU integration is a key objective of all countries in the region. Alignment with the EU CAP is a major challenge, but also an opportunity to modernize agricultural policy. However, alignment of legislation and procedures is not in itself an achievement as long as it is not fully integrated into national policymaking and implementation. Until then it remains merely a cumbersome and expensive exercise. This may be the reason why many countries delay full integration until a very late stage in the negotiation process. Experience from previous accessions has shown that the acceding countries are not yet ready for full participation in CAP schemes, which means that they are not able to benefit fully from the substantial funds becoming available.

A rational and gradual introduction of the elements of the CAP and administrative procedures that takes into account the various possibilities and needs of the countries can contribute to the development of an effective and coherent policy and implementation. The key principle to be observed in this process is to start implementing selected elements of the CAP, which will provide an immediate benefit to the country. Above the stronger role of support to farm and agro-food chain modernization and introduction of per animal and area payments, this could include starting implementation of harmonized CAP marketing standards and quality policy measures in key sectors. Such measures would strengthen the market position of these products, or selection of specific elements of agro- environment policy such as organic production to develop the existing potential in this field. Pursuing this approach would provide practical experience in genuine CAP implementation, both in the private sector and in public administration, and send a clear signal to the EU that the country is serious about the EU integration process.

Besides revealing gaps and forming suggestions, special attention has been given to strengthening cooperation between ministries and agricultural economists experienced in agricultural policy support. This study is the result of this cooperation. The work has been very engaging for the experts from ministries and academia in the network established in its course. It is thus strongly recommended that the established network becomes a permanent platform for regional cooperation and exchange of ideas and experience in the field of agricultural and rural development policy analysis and monitoring. Such a forum will undoubtedly contribute to the improvement of evidence-based policymaking, to facilitate the harmonization of policies in the region and to strengthen the EU integration process in the area of agriculture and rural development.

The FAO and the SWG therefore invite the SEE governments and international donors to support the consolidation of this platform and the strengthening of its analytical capacity to facilitate agricultural and rural development policymaking in the region with the perspective of EU integration. It is the hope of the FAO and the SWG that the EU will also recognize and support these efforts.

Part B

61

AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN ALBANIA

Chapter B.I

AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN ALBANIA

Edvin Zhllima

_{, Grigor Gjeci}

_{, Drini Imami}

1. Introduction

The future alignment of the Albania’s agriculture and rural development policy with the CAP requires a new vision for policymaking as well as a new approach to the design of policy measures, similar to the transformation carried by the new Member States before accession.

In this context, understanding the diversity and complex structure of the national agricultural policies and comparing them with the actual complexity of agricultural policies in the EU is a necessary prerequisite for rational decision‐making in agriculture.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a profile of Albanian agriculture and agricultural policy based on an analysis of key statistical indicators and other data in the light of the European integration process. The main objective is to evaluate the general strengths and weaknesses of Albanian agriculture as well as main differences in policy design and implementation in comparison with the EU.

The main sources of data used in the study were Albanian Institute of Statistics (INSTAT) and Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Water Management (MARDWA). Data analysis was carried in close collaboration with the Department of Agriculture and Rural Policies in MARDWA, the Department of Finance and the Paying Agency. The period of coverage for the analysis is 2007 to 2012.

For a comparative review of budgetary policies, a common template for classification of agricultural policy measures (APM tool) was used (Rednak et al., 2013). APM database was created for the period 2007-2012.

The structure of the chapter consists of four sub-chapters, as follows. The second sub-chapter provides a review of the agricultural sector by evaluating the importance of agriculture in the economy, agricultural output and its structure, agricultural prices and agro-food trade by country and commodity. The third sub-chapter provides an overview of agricultural policy based on a comparative analysis of the agricultural policy budgetary transfers. The last sub-chapter provides recommendations underlying policy-related issues that act as constraints on Albanian efforts to align its policies with the EU.

 _{Agriculture University of Tirana, Faculty of Economics and Agribusiness}  _{Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Water Administration}