ArticlePDF Available

Available agricultural areas and ownership structure of holdings in the Republic of Serbia

Authors:
  • Ekonomski fakultet u Subotici, Srbija

Abstract and Figures

The subject of research in this paper is the analysis and presentation of data on agricultural holdings, the structure of available and utilized area. The main goal is to determine and explain more comprehensively and in detail, by using appropriate methods, and based on available data, the condition of utilized agricultural area and its characteristics by utilization categories and ownership structure of holdings. The importance of this research arises from the fact that the results on utilized agricultural area can be used to adopt appropriate measures and undertake certain activities in land and overall agricultural and rural policy related to sustainable utilization, arrangement and protection of agricultural land and more balanced integrated development of rural areas, as well as to find better solutions in the field of utilization, ownership sector and conditions of agricultural area management.
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 291
AVAILABLE AGRICULTURAL AREAS AND OWNERSHIP
STRUCTURE OF HOLDINGS IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
Nada Trivić1
*Corresponding author E-mail: nada.trivic@ef.uns.ac.rs
A R T I C L E I N F O
Original Article
Received: 02 December 2020
Accepted: 31 May 2021
doi:10.5937/ekoPolj2102291T
UDC 332.62:347.721(497.11)
A B S T R A C T
The subject of research in this paper is the analysis and
presentation of data on agricultural holdings, the structure
of available and utilized area. The main goal is to determine
and explain more comprehensively and in detail, by using
appropriate methods, and based on available data, the
condition of utilized agricultural area and its characteristics
by utilization categories and ownership structure of
holdings. The importance of this research arises from
the fact that the results on utilized agricultural area can
be used to adopt appropriate measures and undertake
certain activities in land and overall agricultural and rural
policy related to sustainable utilization, arrangement
and protection of agricultural land and more balanced
integrated development of rural areas, as well as to nd
better solutions in the eld of utilization, ownership sector
and conditions of agricultural area management.
© 2021 EA. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
utilized/unutilized agricultural
area, agricultural holdings,
ownership structure
JEL: Q15, Q24, R14
Introduction
Starting from the fact that the data on the structure of the agricultural holdings play
a key role in implementation and monitoring the agricultural policy of the European
Union (EU), The Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter: the Ofce)
planned, organized and conducted the “Agricultural farms structure survey (hereinafter:
the Survey) in 2018” The survey was conducted on a sample that included 121,070
agricultural holdings. It was funded from the budget of the Republic of Serbia and
from the pre-accession funds of the European Union, within the IPA 2016 project
(Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance, 2016). The survey is a nationally signicant,
organizationally and programmatically very comprehensive activity of the Ofce in the
eld of agriculture. The obtained data will serve for the creation of the national agrarian
policy, and for providing the basis for the functioning of the system of agricultural
statistics. Applied instruments, coverage, features and standardization of concepts
and denitions are in line with the recommendations of the World Programme for the
census of Agriculture (UN-FAO), the European Parliament Regulations on conducting
1 Nada Trivić, Ph.D., Full Professor, Department of International Economics and Business,
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Economics in Subotica, 24000 Subotica, Segedinski put
9-11, Serbia, E-mail: nada.trivic@ef.uns.ac.rs
292 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
the Farm Structure Survey and Survey on Agricultural Production Method (Regulation
[EC] No 1166/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19. November
2008, on farm structure surveys and survey on agricultural production methods;
Regulation [EC] No 1200/2009, Regulation [EU] No 715/2014), Eurostat methodology
and valid domestic regulations. Besides the agricultural census, the Survey is a key
research that collects internationally comparable data on the funds and structure of
agricultural holdings.
An important segment of the analysis of the collected data is the analysis of available
agricultural land by categories of utilization and the ownership structure of holdings
in the Republic of Serbia, in 2018. The results of such an analysis are intended for the
wider scientic and professional public, with the desire to expand agro-economic and
statistical analysis of the utilization, arrangement and protection of agricultural land in
Serbia - especially by municipalities and areas (Đorđević, at al 2011). The presented
results can be signicant indicators by which the state and local government will be
able to dene the problems of agricultural activity more adequately and accordingly
plan and make appropriate decisions and take appropriate measures for development,
both at the local and state level (Petrović, Miladinović, Novakov, 2007) .
Materials, methods, goals and signicance of the research
The subject of research in this paper is the analysis and presentation of data on
agricultural holdings, the structure of available and utilized area. Main goal of this
research is to determine and explain more comprehensively and in detail, and based on
available databases, professional literature and legislation, using appropriate methods,
the condition of utilized agricultural area (hereinafter: UAA) and its quantitative and
qualitative characteristics – in total and by types of agricultural holdings (hereinafter:
AHs) – family agricultural holdings (FAHs) and agricultural holdings of legal entities
and entrepreneurs (AHLEEs), by statistical regions and lower statistical units of
data grouping (districts and municipalities). The justication of such a dened goals
stems from the knowledge that the current tendencies and the current situation in the
management of agricultural area in general, and especially arable land and areas under
orchards and vineyards (Todić, 2019), as production-signicant utilization categories
of agricultural area, are considered sporadically, without critical consideration of
responsibility of their owners and/or users.
Implementation of such a dened basic research goal indicates necessity of more
detailed and continuous study of the causes that led to the reduction of available
agricultural land and especially its better and more important production categories of
utilization (Tomić, Njegovan, 2013).
The importance of this analysis stems from the possibility to point out to the scientic
and professional public, competent state institutions, owners and/or users of agricultural
area, the need to utilize, arrange and protect agricultural area in Serbia in accordance
with the principle of sustainability (Trivić, 2019).
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 293
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
The signicance of this research stems from the fact that the results of the analysis of utilized
agricultural area can be used to adopt appropriate measures and undertake certain activities
in land and overall agricultural and rural policy (Bogdanov, 2007) related to sustainable use,
arrangement and protection of agricultural area and more even integrated development of
rural areas (European Commission, 2012), as well as to nd better solutions in the eld of
utilization, ownership sector and conditions of agricultural land management.
Results
The starting point and backbone of all the observed parameters is precisely the structure of
agricultural holdings AHs in Serbia. The results show that there were a total of 564,542 AHs in
Serbia in 2018, of which 562,895 were family agricultural holdings (FAHs), only 1,375 agricultural
holdings of legal entities (AHLEs) and 272 agricultural holdings of entrepreneurs (AHEs). It can be
concluded that the total number of agricultural holdings is dominated by FAHs (99.71%).
Table 1. Basic indicators on the number and size of AH in the Republic of Serbia, 2018
Holdings All AHs AHs without land UAA
number % number ∑=100 ha % ha/AH
FAH 562 895 99.71 5 180 97.92 2 916 125 83.90 5.18
AHLE 1 375 0.24 70 1.32 557 866 16.05 405.72
AHE 272 0.05 40 0.76 1 903 0.05 7.00
All AHs 564 542 100.00 5 290 100.00 3 475 894 100.00 6.16
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
AHLEEs are minor in number (only 0.24% and 0.05%), but this group has a signicant
share in UAA and a large average area of property, so it can be concluded that they are
signicant production and economic entities in Serbian agriculture. However, at the
same time, their participation in the NUAA is relatively large.
Table 2. Agricultural holdings with the status of legal entity, by regions
AHs
number of
holdings
FAHs AHLEEs
AHLEs AHEs
number % number % number %
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA 564 542 562 895 100.00 1 375 100.00 272 100.00
SERBIA – NORTH 157 104 156 138 27.74 855 62.18 111 40.81
Belgrade Region 30 033 29 949 5.32 75 5.45 9 3.31
Vojvodina Region 127 071 126 189 22.42 780 56.73 102 37.50
SERBIA – SOUTH 407 438 406 757 72.26 520 37.82 161 59.19
Šumadija and West
Serbia Region 242 636 242 224 43.03 300 21.82 112 41.18
South and East Serbia
Region 164 802 164 533 29.23 220 16.00 49 18.01
Kosovo Region … … … …
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
294 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Regionally, the largest number of FAHs is in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia
(42.97%). This region has the largest number of agricultural holdings of entrepreneurs
AHEs (41.2%), while the largest number of AHLEs is in the Region of Vojvodina (56.0%).
Table 3. Available land per utilization categories in the Republic of Serbia, 2018.
AL
total agricultural land Woodland
area other
all UAA NUAA
Area [ha] 5 178 692 3 765 847 3 475 894 289 953 972 283 440 562
Structure [%] 100.00 72.72 67.12 5.60 18.77 8.51
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
The structure of available land per utilization categories in Serbia is strongly dominated
by UAA (67.12%) – which makes a total of 72.2% of available agricultural land together
with NUAA (5.60%). It is followed by woodland (18.77%) and other land (8.51%) (Table
3). If we take into account the signicant differences in the categories of available land
by region, it is desirable to look at this structure of the UAA and NUAA and by districts.
Table 4. Available land per districts in the Republic of Serbia, 2018.
UAA NUAA Woodland
area Other land AL
total
ha %ha %ha %ha %ha
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA 3 475
894 67.12 289
953 5.60 972
283 18.77 440
562 8.51 5 178
692
SERBIA – NORTH 1 719
899 76.56 76
982 3.43 158
199 7.04 291
414 12.97 2 246
494
Belgrade Region 145 533 55.26 12
340 4.69 30
648 11.64 74
820 28.41 263 340
Vojvodina Region 1 574
366 79.39 64
643 3.6 127
551 6.43 216
594 10.92 1 983
154
SERBIA – SOUTH 1 755
995 59.89 212
971 7.26 814
084 27.76 149
148 5.09 2 932
198
Šumadija and Western
Serbia Region
1 035
998 60.93 76
055 4.47 519
487 30.55 68
708 4.04 1 700
248
Southern and Eastern
Serbia Region 719 997 58.4 136
916 11.11 294
597 23.91 80
440 6.53 1 231
950
Kosovo and Metohija
Region … … … … … …
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
Differences in the representation of the UAA in certain regions range from only
58.44% in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia to 79.39% in the Region of
Vojvodina. Signicant differences in the representation of NUAA are evident, ranging
between 11.11% in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia to 3.26% in the Region
of Vojvodina. The differences are even greater at the district level. NUAA ranges
from 1.17% (Srem District) to 22.78% (Pirot District). Thus, the share of UAA by
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 295
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
regions is between only 58.44% in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia (where
landowners left their properties in large numbers) to as many as 79.39% in the Region
of Vojvodina, which is the richest region in Serbia in terms of AL and benets for
agricultural production (Lovre, Zekić, 2008).
There are also signicant regional differences in the representation of woodland by
districts (Pantić, Živanović Miljković, 2010). Areas covered by woodland comprise
18.77% of the total AL in the Republic of Serbia. At the level of the dened areas, the
share of areas covered by woodland in the total AL ranges from 0.07% (North Banat
District) to 39.58% (Zlatibor District). However, in relation to the above-mentioned
average indicators for Serbia, regional differences in the structure of AL by utilisation
categories point to the following statements:
First, the dominant share of the UAA in the total AL is characteristic for all four statistical
regions, with the representation of the UAA in Vojvodina Region being signicantly
above (79.39%), and in all three regions in central Serbia the representation is relatively
uniformed and signicantly below the national average and ranges from 55.26% in the
Belgrade region, 60.93% in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia and 58.44% in
the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia;
Second, the difference between the total AL and UAA indicates a signicant
representation of one or two of the three individual utilisation categories, namely:
• other land comprises approximately one third of available land in Belgrade region
(28.41%);
• other land is signicantly represented in the structure of the AL of the Region of
Vojvodina (10.92%);
• woodland area comprises 30.55% of AL of Šumadija and Pomoravlje;
• cumulatively shown categories of woodland (23.91%) and NUAA (23.91%),
comprise about one third of the available land in the Region of Southern and
Eastern Serbia (Table 4.)
A signicant aspect of the analysis of AL by utilisation categories is also the analysis of the
relationship between UAA and NUAA by the legal status of holdings (Lovre, 2013). The
majority of AL belongs to FAHs (73.58%), and 26.42% to AHLEEs. However, the share
of FAHs in utilized area is 83.90%, and AHLEEs only 16.10%. The share of FAHs in
NUAA is 35.80%, and AHLEEs even 64.20%. FAHs also has a dominant share in the
category of woodland area (72.57%), and AHLEEs owns only 27.43% of woodland.
296 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Table 5. AL by utilization categories and legal status of holdings in the RS, 2018
AL
total UAA NUAA Woodland area Other
All agricultural holdings AHs
Area ha 5 178 692 3 475 894 289 953 972 283 440 562
% 100.00 67.12 5.60 18.77 8.51
Holdings number 564 542 559 252 109 115 360 662 492 912
% 100.00 99.06 19.33 63.89 87.31
Average ha/AH 9.17 6.22 2.66 2.70 0.89
% 100.00 67.75 28.97 29.39 9.74
AL
total UAA NUAA Woodland area Other
Family agricultural holdings FAHs
Area ha 3 810 550 2 916 125 103 815 705 567 85 042
% 100.00 76.53 2.72 18.52 2.23
Holdings number 562 895 557 715 108 727 360 320 492 083
% 100.00 99.08 19.32 64.01 87.42
Average ha/FAH 6.77 5.23 0.95 1.96 0.17
% 100.00 77.23 14.11 28.93 2.55
Share FAHs (all AHs=100)
Area % 73.58 83.90 35.80 72.57 19.30
all FAHs % 99.71 99.73 99.64 99.91 99.83
Agricultural holdings of legal entities and entrepreneurs AHLEEs
Area ha 1 368 142 559 769 186 138 266 716 355 520
% 100.00 40.91 13.61 19.49 25.99
Holdings number 1 647 1 537 388 342 829
% 100.00 93.32 25.24 88.14 242.40
Average ha/AHLEE 830.69 364.20 479.74 779.87 428.85
% 100.00 43.84 57.75 93.88 51.63
Share AHLEEs (all AHs=100)
Area (%) 26.42 16.10 64.20 27.43 80.70
all
AHLEEs (%) 0.29 0.27 0.36 0.09 0.17
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
Utilized agricultural area of the total available FAHs land is 76.53%, and unutilized is
2.72%. However, the utilized area of AHLEEs is only 40.91%, and the unutilized area
is 13.61% of the available land of this group of holdings.
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 297
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Table 6. Available land by utilization categories and legal status of holdings
All AHs FAHs AHLEEs
AL 5 178 692 ha 3 810 550 ha (73.58%) 1 368 142 ha (26.42%)
UAA 3 475 894 ha 2 916 125 ha (83.90%) 559 769 ha (16.10%)
ha/ AH 6.22 ha/AH 5.23 ha/FAH 364.2 ha/AHLEE
NUAA 289 953 ha 103 815 ha (35.8%) 186 138 ha (64.2%)
ha/ AH 2.66 ha/AH 0.95 ha/FAH 479.7 ha/AHLEE
Woodland 972 283 ha 705 567 ha (72.5%) 266 716 ha (27.43%)
ha/ AH 2.7 ha/AH 1.96 ha/FAH 779.87 ha/AHLEE
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
If we take into account the size of AHLEEs property and their large share in the total
AL, the following can be concluded:
1. The average size of AH property in Serbia is only 6.22 ha/AH UAA. The regional
analysis of this indicator points out that only holdings in the Region of Vojvodina
are with an above-average area of property (12.71 ha/AH or 2.04 times higher) -
which is the result of the concentration of the largest number by area of signicantly
larger AHLEEs. In contrast, holdings properties in all three other regions are lower
than the national average: 4.89 ha/AH in the Belgrade region, 4.28 ha/AH in the
Šumadija and Western Serbia Region and 4.40 ha/AH in the Southern and Eastern
Serbia Region.
2. Legal entities and entrepreneurs comprise only 0.29% of the total number of AHs,
but they have 26.42% of the total AHs at their disposal; their share in UAA is
16.10%, and in NUAA 64.20%.
3. AHLEEs are relatively few (1 647), but have a signicant average size of property
of 364.2 ha of utilised and even 479.74 ha of NUAA and 779.87 ha of woodland.
AHLEEs have at their disposal even 186,138 ha or 64.20% of the total NUAA in Serbia,
which indicates the need for a detailed analysis of the management of agricultural land
owned and utilised by this group of entities (Ševarlić, 2015).
Discussions
The results show that there are signicant differences between the three ownership
subgroups of all holdings, and they are reected in the large disproportion of their
representation in the total number of holdings and the total area of the UAA. From this
point of view, all AHs can be classied into three relatively homogeneous groups of
holdings by size of the property - small (“less than 5 ha”), medium (“5-20 ha”) and large
(“more than 20 ha”). The analysis of the ownership structure according to the share of the
dened three collective groups of AHs indicates certain characteristics, as follows:
- AHs with smaller property - is a group in which the dominant part is concentrated,
even 71.74% of the total number of AH in Serbia, and they utilise only 23.24% of
the total UAA;
298 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
- AHs with medium size of property and comprise 24.29% of the total number of AHs,
and utilise 35.14% of the total UAA;
- AHs with larger property comprise 3.96% of the total number of holdings, and
utilise 41.62% of the total UAA.
Regional analysis of the ownership structure of FAHs indicates signicant differences
in the ownership structure in four statistical regions in Serbia, which are reected in
the following statements:
Table 7. Ownership structure of FAHs in the Republic of Serbia by regions
Indicators Total Without land < 5 ha 5,01-20 ha >20 ha
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
All FAHs number 562 895 5 180 399 271 136 838 21 606
% 100.00 0.92 70.93 24.31 3.84
UAA ha 2 916 125 0 806 971 1 218 203 890 951
% 100.00 0 27.67 41.77 30.55
Belgrade Region
FAHs number 29 949 265 23 069 6 035 580
% 100.00 0.88 77.03 20.15 1.94
UAA ha 118 872 0 45 131 51 237 22 504
% 100.00 0.00 37.97 43.10 18.93
Share of the Belgrade Region (RS=100)
All FAHs % 5.32 5.12 5.78 4.41 2.68
UAA % 4.08 0.00 5.59 4.21 2.53
Vojvodina Region
FAHs number 126 189 3 128 70 140 37 813 15 106
% 100.00 2.48 55.58 29.97 11.97
UAA ha 1 168 428 0 122 094 382 918 663 416
% 100.00 0.00 10.45 32.77 56.78
Share of the Vojvodina Region (RS=100)
All FAHs % 22.42 60.39 17.57 27.63 69.92
UAA % 40.07 0.00 15.13 31.43 74.46
Šumadija and West Serbia Region
FAHs number 242 224 740 179 730 58 533 3 221
% 100.00 0.31 74.20 24.16 1.33
UAA ha 985 301 0 386 710 495 038 103 553
% 100.00 0.00 39.25 50.24 10.51
Share of the Šumadija and Western Serbia Region (RS = 100)
All FAHs % 43.03 14.29 45.01 42.78 14.91
UAA % 33.79 0.00 47.92 40.64 11.62
South and East Serbia Region
FAHs number 164 533 1 047 126 331 34 456 2 699
% 100.00 0.64 76.78 20.94 1.64
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 299
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Indicators Total Without land < 5 ha 5,01-20 ha >20 ha
UAA ha 643 525 0 253 035 289 012 101 478
% 100.00 0.00 39.32 44.91 15.77
Share of the Southern and Eastern Serbia Region (RS=100)
All FAHs % 29.23 20.21 31.64 25.18 12.49
UAA % 22.07 0.00 31.36 23.72 11.39
Kosovo and Metohija Region
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
FAHs larger than 20 ha are dominant in the Region of Vojvodina (69.91% of the total
number of holdings of this size in the Republic of Serbia) and utilize 74.46% of land in
the group of larger properties. Representation of FAHs larger than 20 ha in the Belgrade
region is 2.68%, in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia 14.91%, and in the
region of Southern and Eastern Serbia 12.49% of the holdings of this group.
The largest part of FAHs with a holding of up to 5 ha and FAHs with a holding of
medium size (5–20 ha) is in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia (over 45%). In
the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia, FAHs with a property of up to 5 ha (31.64%)
are dominant, and holdings with a property of over 20 ha have almost negligible share
in the total number of FAHs.
The general conclusions of the regional analysis of the ownership structure between
collective groups of FAHs in Serbia are:
1. small holdings (“up to 5 ha”) are dominant in the total number of FAHs in all
four statistical regions (between 55.58% in the Region of Vojvodina and 77.03%
in the Belgrade region), and are in second place in terms of representation in total
UAA in all regions (37.97% in the Belgrade region and 39.32% in the Region of
Southern and Eastern Serbia), while in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia
this group of FAHs utilize 39.25% of the total UAA of the region, and in the Region
of Vojvodina have the lowest share in the UAA (10.45%);
2. large holdings (“over 20 ha”) are the least represented in the total number of FAHs
in all four regions (between 1.33% in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia to
11.97% in the Region of Vojvodina); they are least represented in the UAA in three
regions (between 10.51% in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia and 18.93%
in the Belgrade region), while in the region of Vojvodina they are the dominant
group in the UAA - they utilize 56.78% of the UAA region.
3. medium holdings (“5–20 ha”) are between small and large holdings in terms of
representation in the number of FAHs in all four regions (between 20.15% in the
Belgrade region and 29.97% in the Vojvodina region); representation in the UAA
is 32.77% in the Region of Vojvodina and 44.91% in the Region of Southern and
Eastern Serbia, and in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia they are the most
represented, with 50.24% of the UAA.
300 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
The distribution of AHLEEs and their UAA by regions in Serbia points to the
following observation:
Table 8. Ownership structure of AHLEEs in the Republic of Serbia by regions
Indicators Total Without land < 5 ha 5,01-20 ha >20 ha
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
All AHLEEs number 1 647 109 464 300 774
% 100.00 6.62 28.17 18.21 46.99
UAA ha 559 769 0 834 3230 555 705
% 100.00 0 0.15 0.58 99.27
Belgrade Region
AHLEEs number 83 6 27 18 32
% 100.00 7.23 32.53 21.69 38.55
UAA ha 26 661 0 55 198 26 408
% 100.00 0.00 0.21 0.74 99.05
Share of the Belgrade Region (RS=100)
All AHLEEs % 5.04 5.50 5.82 6.00 4.13
UAA % 4.76 0.00 6.59 6.13 4.75
Vojvodina Region
AHLEEs number 883 45 151 153 534
% 100.00 5.10 17.10 17.33 60.48
UAA ha 405 938 0 271 1686 403 981
% 100.00 0.00 0.07 0.42 99.52
Share of the Vojvodina Region (RS=100)
All AHLEEs % 53.61 41.28 32.54 51.00 68.99
UAA % 72.52 0.00 32.49 52.20 72.70
Šumadija and West Serbia Region
AHLEEs number 412 37 199 85 91
% 100.00 9.02 48.23 20.69 22.05
UAA ha 50 697 0 355 863 49 479
% 100.00 0.00 0.70 1.70 97.60
Share of the Šumadija and Western Serbia Region (RS = 100)
All AHLEEs % 25.02 33.94 42.89 28.33 11,76
UAA % 9.06 0.00 42.57 26.72 8.90
South and East Serbia Region
AHLEEs number 269 21 86 44 118
% 100.00 7.95 31.82 16.22 44.01
UAA ha 76 472 0 153 482 75 837
% 100.00 0.00 0.20 0.63 99.17
Share of the Southern and Eastern Serbia Region (RS=100)
All AHLEEs % 16.34 20.01 18.48 14.56 15.24
UAA % 13.61 0.00 18.36 14.92 13.60
Kosovo and Metohija Region
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 301
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Without land is 109 AHLEEs of the total listed AHLEEs (1,647) or 6.62%, which is a
signicant percentage in relation to the total number of AHs (in the Region of Southern and
Eastern Serbia 20.01%, and in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia 33.94% of the
total number of AHLEEs without land). In all regions, AHLEEs with a property of more than
20 ha utilize the largest part of the land available to this group of holdings. The analysis of
the ownership structure of the AHLEEs in four statistical regions in Serbia, according to the
representation of three collective groups of holdings with a certain size of property, indicates
the following regional differences:
Small holdings dominate in the total number of holdings, and are minor in the total UAA
holdings of legal entities and entrepreneurs in three regions - Belgrade (32.53% of AHLEEs
of this region and 0.21% of UAA of AHLEEs), in the Region of Šumadija and Western
Serbia (48.23% of AHLEEs of this region and 0.70% of UAA of AHLEEs of the region) and
Southern and Eastern Serbia (31.82% of AHLEEs and 0.20% of UAA of AHLEEs), while in
the Region of Vojvodina the representation is in the number of holdings (17.10% of AHLEEs),
and the least represented are in UAA (0.07% of UAA of AHLEEs of this region );
Large holdings dominate in the total of UAA and are differently represented in the total
number of AHLEEs in all four statistical regions - in the Belgrade region this group
makes 38.55% of AHLEEs region and 99.05% of UAA of AHLEE of this region, in
Vojvodina this group is 60.48% of AHLEEs and 99.52% of UAA of AHLEEs region, in
Šumadija and Western Serbia they comprise 22.05% of AHLEEs and 97.60% of UAA of
AHLEEs, and in Southern and Eastern Serbia 44.01% of AHLEEs and 99.17% of UAA
of AHLEEs of this region;
Medium holdings are relatively more represented in the total number, and minor in the total of
UAA of AHLEEs in all four statistical regions - in the Belgrade region this group of holdings
comprises 21.69% of AHLEEs and utilizes 0.74% of UAA of AHLEEs of this region; in the
Region of Vojvodina 17.33% are AHLEEs and utilize 0.42% of UAA of AHLEEs of this
region; in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia 20.69% of AHLEEs is this group of
holdings and they utilize 1.70% of UAA of AHLEEs of this region, in the Region of Southern
and Eastern Serbia this group comprises 16.22% of AHLEEs and utilizes 0.63% of UAA of
AHLEEs of this region.
FAHs are dominant in the total number of holdings (99.71%) and, at a slightly lower level, in
the total number of UAA (83.84%).
FAHs with smaller property are dominant in the total number of FAHs in all four statistical
regions - 70.95% of the total number of FAHs, and their share in the UAA is only 27.67%. This
result suggests a large fragmentation of FAHs properties.
FAHs with a medium size of property comprise 24.31% of the total number of FAHs, and
the share in UAA is 41.77%. The largest part of FAHs with medium-sized property is in the
Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia (over 45%).
FAHs with larger property comprise only 3.84% of FAHs, and their share in UAA is
30.57%. So the number of large FAHs is small, but they utilize one third of the FAHs land.
302 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
Large holdings are the least represented in the total number of FAHs in all four regions; in the
Region of Vojvodina and the dominant group in the UAA, utilize 56.78% of the UAA region.
Table 9. Regional analysis of the ownership structure of FAHs collective groups in Serbia
Region
Small holdings up to 5 ha Medium holdings 5 – 20 ha Large holdings over
20 ha
Share
in the
number of
FAH
Share in
UAA
Share
in the
number of
FAH
Share in
UAA
Share
in the
number of
FAH
Share in
UAA
Belgrade Region 77.03% 37.97% 20.15% 43.10% 1.94% 18.93%
Vojvodina Region 55.58% 10.45% 29.97% 32.77% 11.97% 56.78%
Sumadija and West
Serbia Region 74.20% 39.26% 24.16% 50.24% 1.33% 10.51%
South and East
Serbia Region 76.78% 39.32% 20.,94% 44.91% 1.64% 15.77%
Kosovo Region
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
AHLEEs represent, by number, a small group (only 1,647 households or 0.29% of the
total number of AHs), but have a signicantly higher share in UAA (16.10%)
AHLEEs with smaller property comprise 28.71% of the total number of holdings in this group,
and their share in UAA is only 0.15% (excluding land 6.67%). These holdings dominate in the
number of AHLEEs, and are minor in the total UAA of AHLEEs holdings in three regions;
AHLEEs with a medium size of holdings comprise 18.21%, and their share in the UAA is
only 0.58%. AHLEEs with larger holdings comprise 47%, and their share in the UAA is even
99%. However, in the category of holdings larger than 100 ha it is 29.57% of the total number of
AHLEEs and they utilize 96.76% of the land of this group of holdings. Large holdings dominate
in the total of UAA and are differently represented in the total number of AHLEEs in regions.
Table 10. Regional analysis of the ownership structure of AHLEEs in Serbia, 2018
Region
Small holdings up to 5 ha Medium holdings 5 – 20
ha Large holdings over 20 ha
Share in the
number of
AHLEEs
Share in
UAA
Share in
the number
of AHLEEs
Share in
UAA
Share in the
number of
AHLEEs
Share in
UAA
Belgrade
Region 32.53% 0.21% 21.69% 0.74% 38.55% 99.05%
Vojvodina
Region 17.10% 0.07% 17.33% 0.42% 60.48% 99.50%
Sumadija and
West Serbia
Region
48.23% 0.70% 20.69% 1.70% 22.05% 97.60%
South and East
Serbia Region 31.82% 0.20% 16.22% 0.63% 44.00% 99.17%
Kosovo Region
Source: author’s calculation based on data of the Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Serbia
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 303
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
The analysis of the ownership structure of all AHs according to the legal status of
holdings in Serbia indicates that:
FAHs is dominant in the total number of holdings (99.71%) and, at a slightly lower level,
in the total UAA (83.84%). In the group of holdings with smaller property, FAHs occupy
70.95% of the total number of FAHs, and their share in UAA is only 27.67%. This result
suggests a large fragmentation of FAHs properties. In the group of holdings with medium
size of property, there are 24.31% of the total number of FAHs, and their share in the
UAA of FAHs is 41.77%. In the group of holdings with larger property, only 3.84% are
FAHs, and their share in the UAA of this group of holdings is 30.57%. So the number of
large FAHs is small, but they utlize one third of the FAHs land;
AHLEEs by number represent a small group of holdings (only 1,647 households or
0.29% of the total number of AHs), but have a signicantly higher share in the total
UAA (16.10%) and are the dominant category by number of holdings and UAA in two
groups of holdings with larger properties (over 20 ha and over 100 ha). In the group
of holdings with smaller properties, AHLEEs comprise 0.12% of the total number of
holdings in this group, and their share in UAA is only 0.11%. In the group of holdings
with medium-sized property, AHLEEs comprise 0.22%, and their share in UAA in this
group is only 0.26%. In the group of holdings with larger property, AHLEEs comprise
3.58%, and their share in UAA is as high as 38.41%. However, in the category of
properties larger than 100 ha there is 29.57% of the total number of AHLEEs and they
utilize 96.76% of the land of this group of holdings.
AHLEEs are relatively small (1,647), but have a signicant average size of property,
an average of 364 ha of utilized property and even 479 ha of NUAA; 779 ha of
woodland. AHLEEs have at their disposal even 186,138 ha or 64.20% of the total
NUAA in Serbia, which indicates the need for a detailed analysis of agricultural land
management in this group of entities.
Conclusions
The aim of this paper represents a realistic view of economic strength and type of
agricultural production on holdings in Serbia, in order to obtain a quality, analytical and
comparable basis for analysis of structural characteristics and economic parameters of
AHs and conceptualization of agricultural policy measures, but also for comparative
analysis with AHs in EU countries and neighboring countries [Simonović, 2004], as
well as a base for scientists in further scientic research on the structural characteristics
and economic performance of agricultural holdings in Serbia. Systematization of data
and analysis of the obtained results led to a number of important conclusions about this
segment of agriculture in the Republic of Serbia. Some of the basic conclusions can be
singled out in a brief review of the overall results obtained.
According to the obtained results in the Republic of Serbia in 2018, there are 564,542
agricultural holdings, 562,895 family agricultural holdings, 1,375 agricultural holdings
of legal entities and 272 agricultural holdings of entrepreneurs. It can be concluded that
304 http://ea.bg.ac.rs
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
the total number of holdings is dominated by family holdings (99.71%). The largest
part of the total number of FAHs is in the region of Šumadija and Western Serbia (about
43%), and the smallest is in the region of Vojvodina (5.32%). AHLEEs are minor in
number (only 0.29%), but this group has a signicant share in the UAA and a large
average area of property, so it can be concluded that they are important production and
economic entities in Serbian agriculture.
It can be concluded that Serbian agriculture is characterized by a dominant number
of FAHs in relation to the AHLEEs. The average size of property is small (6.22 ha/
AH; 5.23 ha/FAH and 364.2 ha/AHLEE - Table 6). The FAHs category is dominated
by FAHs with a property of less than 5 ha, and in the AHLEEs category the most
represented are entities with a property of more than 20 ha. This ownership group uses
the largest part of the land in all observed regions. There is an obvious contrast between
the smallest and the largest ownership group of holdings and their representation in the
total number of agricultural holdings AHs and in the total area UAA.
Acknowledgements
In this research, data collected by the “Agricultural farms structure survey in Serbia, 2018”
were used. The organization and implementation of the Survey was nanced from the
budget of the Republic of Serbia and from the pre-accession funds of the European Union,
within the IPA 2016 project (Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance, 2016). The author is
employed at the University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Economics in Subotica, Serbia.
Conict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conict of interest.
References
1. Bogdanov, N. (2007). Small Rural Households in Serbia and Rural Non-
Agricultural Economy. Beograd: UNDP. [in Serbian: Bogdanov, N. (2007). Mala
ruralna domaćinstva u Srbiji i ruralna nepolјoprivredna ekonomija]
2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323346109_Mala_ruralna_
domacinstva_u_Srbiji_i_ruralna_nepoljoprivredna_ekonomija
3. Đorđević, A., Knežević, M., Tomić, Z,, Golubović, S., Onjija, A., Životić, Lj.
& Nikolić, N. (2011). Methodology for Systematic Monitoring of Land Quality
and Condition in the Republic of Serbia. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu
Polјoprivredni fakultet [in Serbian: Metodologija za sistematsko praćenje
kvaliteta i stanja zemlјišta u Republici Srbiji] https://www.google.com/url?sa=
t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwif6pvDyu3qAhXmQ
UEAHUviB-QQFjABegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ekologija.gov.
rs%2F%3Fwpfb_dl%3D47&usg=AOvVaw1nBkKRbO8rS8CVQ6JZ6HR3
http://ea.bg.ac.rs 305
Economics of Agriculture, Year 68, No. 2, 2021, (pp. 291-305), Belgrade
4. European Commission. (2012). Agriculture in the European Union. Statistical
and Economic Information 2011, EU Directorate General for Agriculture and
Rural Development, Brussels https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&e
src=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjE1sPJy-3qAhWMY8AKHX-aA9
0QFjABegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Feur-lex.europa.eu%2Fresource.
html%3Furi%3Dcellar%3A58d03bba-ca5d-42cb-aba6-8ce38f10898f.0001.02%2
FDOC_1%26format%3DPDF&usg=A
5. Lovre, K. & Zekić, S. (2008). Contradiction and Complementarity of Agrarian
Policy and Rural Development Policy. Anali, Ekonomskog fakulteta u Subotici, Br.
20: 91–97. ISSN 0350-2120 [in Serbian: Lovre, K., Zekić, S. (2008). Protivrečnost
i komplementarnost agrarne politike i politike ruralnog razvoja] http://scindeks.
ceon.rs/article.aspx?artid=0350-21200820091L
6. Lovre, K. (2013). Policy Of Support To Agriculture And Rural Development. Agri-
Food Sector in Serbia: State and Challenges. Serbian Association of Agricultural
Economists, number 157558 edited by Škorić, D., Tomić, D. & Popović, V. https://
ideas.repec.org/b/ags/saaemn/157558.html
7. Pantić, M. & Živanović Miljković, J. (2010). Regional Diferencies between Rural
Areas of Serbia in Population Aging and Agricultural Activities: Case Studies of
the Inđija and Knjaževac Municipalities. SPATIUM International Review, 22, 29–
37. http://raumplan.iaus.ac.rs/handle/123456789/179
8. Petrović, Ž., Miladinović, M. & Novakov, M. (2007). Development of Local
Advisory Service and Employment of Agricultural Experts. Economics of
Agriculture, 54(1): 25–39. [in Serbian: Petrović, Ž., Miladinović, M., Novakov,
M. (2007). Razvoj lokalne savetodavne službe i zapošljavanje poljoprivrednih
stručnjaka] http://scindeks.ceon.rs/article.aspx?artid=0352-34620701025P
9. Simonović, Z. (2004). Land ownership problems in transition. Economics of
Agriculture, 51(3–4): 17–23. [in Serbian: Simonović, Z. (2004). Problemi zemljišne
svojine u tranziciji] https://scindeks.ceon.rs/article.aspx?query=ISSID%26and%2
63715&page=1&sort=8&stype=0&backurl=%2Fissue.aspx%3Fissue%3D3715
10. Ševarlić, M. (2015). Agricultural Land in the Republic of Serbia. Beograd:
Republički zavod za statistiku. [in Serbian: Ševarlić, M. (2015). Poljoprivredno
Zemljište u Republici Srbiji] https://issuu.com/zavodstatistika/docs/
poljoprivredno_zemljiste_-_web
11. Todić, B. (2019). Fruit growing. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku. [in
Serbian: Todić, B. (2019). Voćarstvo.] https://www.stat.gov.rs/sr-latn/oblasti/
poljoprivreda-sumarstvo-i-ribarstvo/anketaostrukturipopgazdinstava/
12. Tomić, D. & Njegovan, Z. (2013). Agriculture of the Western Balkan Countries in
Globalisation and Liberalisation Processes. Serbian Association of Agricultural
Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/b/ags/saaemn/157565.html
13. Trivić, N. (2019). Land. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku. [in Serbian:
Trivić, N. (2019). Zemljište.] https://www.stat.gov.rs/sr-latn/oblasti/poljoprivreda-
sumarstvo-i-ribarstvo/anketaostrukturipopgazdinstava/
... Agricultural land in the Republic of Serbia is mostly privately owned (Trivić, 2021). During the last two decades, there has been a noticeable transition within the ownership structure of agricultural land, with the growth of private ownership from 80% in 2002 to 83% in 2010, and as much as 96% in 2019 . ...
Article
Full-text available
Today, in the era of industrial expansion of developing countries, the Republic of Serbia strives to maintain the required level of progress and join the European Union. On this path of transition, it is necessary to use the comparative advantages in relation to the countries of the region, but also the EU member states. Analysing the available data, it can be established that an important comparative advantage of Serbia lies in the agricultural sector. The aim of this paper is to point out the mentioned comparative advantages, primarily by using the historical-comparative method, and to provide a basis for further decision-making to economic policy makers at the regional and national level. The concept of agricultural and economic policy should be based on the complete revival of agriculture, its revitalization, financial consolidation, innovation and affirmation of the intensification of the production framework.
Book
Full-text available
Projekat „Analiza potreba malih ruralnih domaćinstava u Srbiji“ sproveden je u saradnji Ministarstva poljoprivrede, šumarstva i vodoprivrede Republike Srbije i Programa Ujedinjenih nacija za razvoj (UNDP) tokom 2006/07. godine, uz finansijsku podršku Austrijske razvojne agencije (ADA) i UNDP-a. Projekat je imao za cilj da identifikuje i analizira ključne socio-ekonomske indikatore malih ruralnih domaćinstava u Srbiji sa aspekta mogućnosti unapređenja njihovih performansi u pravcu diversifikacije ruralne ekonomije. Identifikovanje specifičnih razvojnih ograničenja malih ruralnih domaćinstava i objektivno sagledavanje njihovih potreba i mogućnosti razvoja, treba da doprinese kreiranju validnih mehanizama i strategija za pokretanje procesa smanjenja siromaštva u ruralnim područjima. Najvažniji ciljevi projekta su: 1. da obezbedi validnu, dokumentovanu i analitičku osnovu za javnu raspravu o ruralnoj ekonomiji Srbije, sa posebnim akcentom na položaj i perspektivu malih ruralnih domaćinstava, 2. da neposredno ukaže i pomogne u oblikovanju vladinih strategija/politika u oblasti ruralnog i regionalnog razvoja i smanjenja siromaštva, 3. da formuliše preporuke za kreiranje različitih razvojnih programa, odnosno budućih intervencija u ruralnim područjima na osnovu sagledavanja pojedinih aspekata položaja i perspektive malih ruralnih domaćinstava. Ciljna grupa projekta su mala ruralna domaćinstva sa neaktiviranim razvojnim potencijalom koji se može mobilisati stvaranjem adekvatnih uslova za diversifikaciju aktivnosti i dohotka.
Article
Full-text available
As one of the signs of demographic change, population aging influences various spatial categories: economic activities, social features, land-use, perspectives for future development and more. Even though the process is indicative on a national level, there are significant differences among geographically and functionally distinctive regions. Based on considerable regional differences in the development of Serbia, this paper analyses the key problems of rural areas related to the interdependences of population aging and agricultural activities. Research on aging processes, changes in agricultural activities and their features is based here on the examples of two case studies. The Inđija and Knjaževac Municipalities have been chosen to represent geographically different regions - lowland and mountainous. This study uses both quantitative and qualitative approaches in order to achieve a better understanding of the situation. Statistical data were used to illustrate processes of aging and agriculture where data from two census years indicate a trend of changes. Interviews conducted with representatives of local government, entrepreneurs and local citizens from the villages are the source of information for quantitative analysis. Population aging and agriculture are examined separately, followed by an illustration of their interdependences.
Methodology for Systematic Monitoring of Land Quality and Condition in the Republic of Serbia
  • A Đorđević
  • M Knežević
  • Z Tomić
  • S Golubović
  • A Onjija
  • Lj Životić
  • N Nikolić
Đorđević, A., Knežević, M., Tomić, Z,, Golubović, S., Onjija, A., Životić, Lj. & Nikolić, N. (2011). Methodology for Systematic Monitoring of Land Quality and Condition in the Republic of Serbia. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu -Polјoprivredni fakultet [in Serbian: Metodologija za sistematsko praćenje kvaliteta i stanja zemlјišta u Republici Srbiji] https://www.google.com/url?sa= t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwif6pvDyu3qAhXmQ UEAHUviB-QQFjABegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ekologija.gov. rs%2F%3Fwpfb_dl%3D47&usg=AOvVaw1nBkKRbO8rS8CVQ6JZ6HR3
Contradiction and Complementarity of Agrarian Policy and Rural Development Policy. Anali, Ekonomskog fakulteta u Subotici
  • K Lovre
  • S Zekić
Lovre, K. & Zekić, S. (2008). Contradiction and Complementarity of Agrarian Policy and Rural Development Policy. Anali, Ekonomskog fakulteta u Subotici, Br. 20: 91-97. ISSN 0350-2120 [in Serbian: Lovre, K., Zekić, S. (2008). Protivrečnost i komplementarnost agrarne politike i politike ruralnog razvoja] http://scindeks. ceon.rs/article.aspx?artid=0350-21200820091L
Fruit growing. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku
  • B Todić
Todić, B. (2019). Fruit growing. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku. [in Serbian: Todić, B. (2019). Voćarstvo.] https://www.stat.gov.rs/sr-latn/oblasti/ poljoprivreda-sumarstvo-i-ribarstvo/anketaostrukturipopgazdinstava/
Land ownership problems in transition
  • Z Simonović
Simonović, Z. (2004). Land ownership problems in transition. Economics of Agriculture, 51(3-4): 17-23. [in Serbian: Simonović, Z. (2004). Problemi zemljišne svojine u tranziciji] https://scindeks.ceon.rs/article.aspx?query=ISSID%26and%2 63715&page=1&sort=8&stype=0&backurl=%2Fissue.aspx%3Fissue%3D3715
Agriculture of the Western Balkan Countries in Globalisation and Liberalisation Processes
  • D Tomić
  • Z Njegovan
Tomić, D. & Njegovan, Z. (2013). Agriculture of the Western Balkan Countries in Globalisation and Liberalisation Processes. Serbian Association of Agricultural Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/b/ags/saaemn/157565.html
Policy Of Support To Agriculture And Rural Development. Agri-Food Sector in Serbia: State and Challenges. Serbian Association of Agricultural Economists
  • K Lovre
Lovre, K. (2013). Policy Of Support To Agriculture And Rural Development. Agri-Food Sector in Serbia: State and Challenges. Serbian Association of Agricultural Economists, number 157558 edited by Škorić, D., Tomić, D. & Popović, V. https:// ideas.repec.org/b/ags/saaemn/157558.html
Agricultural Land in the Republic of Serbia. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku
  • M Ševarlić
Ševarlić, M. (2015). Agricultural Land in the Republic of Serbia. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku. [in Serbian: Ševarlić, M. (2015). Poljoprivredno Zemljište u Republici Srbiji] https://issuu.com/zavodstatistika/docs/ poljoprivredno_zemljiste_-_web
Land. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku
  • N Trivić
Trivić, N. (2019). Land. Beograd: Republički zavod za statistiku. [in Serbian: Trivić, N. (2019). Zemljište.] https://www.stat.gov.rs/sr-latn/oblasti/poljoprivredasumarstvo-i-ribarstvo/anketaostrukturipopgazdinstava/