Actually, I have a degree in Public Administration from Sofi a University. I worked as a coordinator and organizer at a media outlet for ten years. It was a nice job, but I don’t like being confi ned to an offi ce all day. I prefer to be a little bit freer. I love freedom and nature. So that’s why [I decided to start farming]. I had inherited some land – where the farm is now – from my grandfather. Later, I also started buying land. The land was abandoned. So I decided to do a project here. I got in touch with some people from a consultancy company
19 In ancient Greek mythology, Sisyphus was founder and king of Corinth who was pun-
ished by the gods for his perspicacity by being forced to roll an immense boulder up a hill, only to watch it roll back down, repeating this action for eternity. The story of the ancient Greek hero inspired Albert Camus who, in his existential-philosophical essay “The Myth of Sisyphus”, compares human life to the efforts of the ancient Greek hero, a symbol of the diffi culty of hav- ing to eternally begin anew.
who were doing such projects. SAPARD was still in place at that time. That was before 2008. And I decided I had to do something with that abandoned piece of land [since it was mine anyway]. (…) At present I have some 54 hectares in one area and some 100 hectares of pastures and meadows in another. The land I use intensively, which is around the farm, is 54 hectares. I’m currently developing the other 1,000 hectares, which I took two years ago, but I intend to set up another farm. But it will be for meat cattle. Here we raise dairy sheep and breed indigenous, local, breeds – West Stara Planina sheep. I’m a member of this association – [of breeders] of West Stara Planina sheep. I’m also a member of the association of organic farmers. But I get nothing out of it, so to speak. (…) I thought I’d stay here in Sofi a, say, while someone else looked after my livestock. I thought I wouldn’t have to make any effort to make things work out. But things turned out to be much more serious. But I’m the sort of person who, once I set out to do something, I don’t stop until it’s done. I wanted it to be livestock farming from the very beginning. The location of the farm is ideal for it. The sheep shed I built is high up – the lowest point is some 600 m above sea level. It’s a new one. I built it in 2008, with a cottage for the staff. The pastures start above it and reach an altitude of 815-820 m. It’s mountain livestock farming proper. And presumably around me there are no arable lands that are sprayed. It turned out that after I got certifi ed as organic through the dairy factory [which subcontracts the producer], the price of milk was very good for me. Milk, milk production is the main [budget] item in the economy of the farm. So that’s why I decided the farm would be both for meat and for milk. Because the conditions are ideal for it. Once a year, and sometimes twice a year, people from their [the dairy factory’s] certifi cation company come to inspect my farm – the pastures, feedstuffs, way of feeding.
(Producer of organic sheep’s milk – 1, 2014) The location of the producer’s land, the inherited experience and traditions, commitment to a particular way of life, but also knowledge (education and professional contacts) can make an urbanite – who, however, has rural roots – set up a livestock farm. In the portrait under review, though, the producer took up organic farming as a result of the actions of a large Bulgarian dairy factory that is almost entirely export-oriented, which was looking to widen its market as well as its range of suppliers of milk. Thus, the conversion to organic farming was done under pressure from the market – the organic dairy factory offered the producer not just a higher price but also a secure market and a specifi c value-orientation in tune with his own beliefs – producing organic milk. Furthermore, the dairy factory takes care of certifi cation and control, thereby making things easier for the producer. All those factors have “bound” the producer to the dairy factory, since only a larger organic dairy factory, such as does not exist in Bulgaria, could have offered him better terms and conditions. In this particular case, the “bondage” is entirely positive because
it is governed simultaneously by the market and industrial orders, but also by the civic order of worth (sharing the idea of organic production). Moreover, the idea that the produce is exported and fetches prices that are unthinkable for the Bulgarian market made the undertaking of organic farming all the more worthwhile. Since we are talking about a newly established farm, it is the producer who was looking for a market – that is, who wanted to become part of the community of producers, of people and organizations that operate in the organic sector and/or have experience in it. The dairy factory in question is actually the only one that produces certifi ed organic sheep’s milk cheese in Bulgaria and, as such, is not diffi cult to identify as a potential partner. Although it is a monopolist, the price it offers seems good as there is nothing to compare it with except for the price for conventional produce. Hence, the monopoly in the sector is seen by producers as a good opportunity that is consistent with both their social and economic values.
The dairy factory does not have a strategy of looking specifi cally for newly established farms as partners. It looks for farms that guarantee the purity of their produce because of their location and natural resources. The good price it offers is an incentive for long-existing conventional farms to convert to organic farming.
My father was a veterinarian and he began raising sheep after 1989. He started out with 40-50 sheep. After I fi nished my military service, their number increased to 80 and then we bought some more, and it increased to 120-130. We kept female lambs [to breed from] and increased our fl ock to 450 sheep. We started organic farming four years ago. The people from the dairy factory that buys organic milk told us it would be more profi table for us to work for them, so that’s how it happened. And now we’re selling our milk to them. They constantly conduct inspections [on our farm].
(Producer of organic sheep’s milk – 2, 2014) Contrary to the case in Portrait 1, here the producers do not fully identify themselves with the milk processor/trader. They know little about the latter’s history, mentioning only the dairy factory’s name and the fact that it works for export and exercises control over their farms and the conditions in which they raise livestock. Although the producers and the processor/trader are mutually dependent, since it is the only, or one of the very few, of its kind in Bulgaria the processor/ trader is regarded by the producers as being in a dominant, dictating position because it was the initiator of the market exchange, because it offers a higher price than conventional processors, and above all because of the control it exercises over their farms. Both producers of organic sheep’s milk did not know the name of the certifi cation company that controls them – to them, the fi gure exercising control is in fact the processor/trader. Unlike the case described in Portrait 1, here the dominant orders of worth are those of the market and industrial worlds. The signifi cance of
producing organic products is recognized only partly and superfi cially – that is, there is almost no identifi cation with the civic worth of producing clean food, just as there are no close personal relationships between the contractors. The relations of subcontracting – that is, of inter-corporate/inter-organizational dependence – have in fact led to the assimilation of the producers. They perceive themselves as being in a dependent position, and therefore give priority to the orders of worth of the market and industrial worlds.