Agricultural land in Serbia

1. Changes in the area and structure of agricultural land according to regular statistical reports (1960–2012)

According to data from regular annual statistical surveys in the period 1960-2012. year., agricultural land was reduced by only 299 thousand hectares or by 5,6 percent, and its representation from 69,3 percent to 65,5 percent of the total territory of Serbia.

The analysis of the indicators calculated and shown in table 18 indicates the following significant tendencies and findings:

• the tendency to reduce agricultural land is characteristic for both macroregions and is a consequence of its constant occupation for non-agricultural purposes (residential, industrial and other infrastructure facilities) or its conversion to forest land in hilly and mountainous demographically significantly depopulated areas;

• the absolute and relatively significantly greater reduction of higher quality and most productive arable land in Central Serbia (by as much as 297 thousand hectares or by 14,8 percent) than in Vojvodina (by 18 thousand hectares or by only 1,7 percent) is a consequence of their more extensive return to meadows and pastures as a more natural but productive less intensive way of using land and/or completely abandoning the cultivation of arable land and its expression as an area of ​​unused agricultural land in dominant the hilly-mountainous area "below the Sava and Danube";

• the increase in the area under orchards - in total (by 7,9 percent) and in both macroregions (by 2,9 percent in Central Serbia and especially in Vojvodina - by as much as 2,7 times) is the result of an increasingly pronounced production orientation on the surface of larger, economically stronger and relatively younger owners of agricultural holdings and/or businessmen from companies of various forms of organization towards long-term investment specialization in more market-profitable and export-oriented fruit production;

• the relatively largest decrease in the area under vineyards - in total (by 53,7 percent) and in both macroregions (by 51,0 percent in Central Serbia and by as much as 63,8 percent in Vojvodina) is a consequence of the clearing of vineyards with extensive production due to a reduction in the available labor force on agricultural farms and the investment impossibility of raising modern and production-economically more productive plantation vineyards by the owners of smaller agricultural farms;

• mutually opposite macro-regional tendencies of changes in areas under meadows (increased by 17,9 percent in Central Serbia and decreased by 12,5 percent in Vojvodina) and pastures (also increased by 7,7 percent in Central Serbia and decreased in Vojvodina - by as much as 43,5 percent).

The stated findings are based on the analysis of statistical data and calculated indicators in table 18 and the results of research by the author of this publication in independent and joint works [Ševarlić, M. (1982a); Ševarlić, M. (1989); Miladinović M., Ševarlić M. (1996a); Isaković M., Ševarlić M. (1996-b); Antonović G., Milivojević J., Miladinović M., Ševarlić M., Lješević M., Protić N., Đorović M., Radojević R., Agricultural land 105 Stojanović S., Rudić D., Spasov P., Andrić S. , Kuburić J. (1997a); Ševarlić M., Todorović Marina (2004); Tomić D., Ševarlić MM, Nikolić MM (2010); ...], as well as experiences during decades of monitoring the "situation on the ground", point to four more general conclusions:

• first, the "suspicion" was founded that the average reduction of agricultural land in Serbia during the analyzed 52-year period was "totally" 5750 ha/year - which is confirmed by the final results of the 2012 Census of Agriculture;

• second, it is worrying that the reduction of agricultural land was generated mainly by the reduction of arable land and vineyards as a category of more intensive land use in both macroregions, with the fact that in Vojvodina arable land decreased relatively less (by only 1,1 percent) and vineyards significantly more (by even 63,8 percent) than in Central Serbia (similarly for 14,8 percent and 51,0 percent);

• the third, the demographic devastation in Central Serbia - excluding the Belgrade region, especially in the South and East Serbia region, is the generator of the complete abandonment of the cultivation of arable land and vineyards and, to a lesser extent, their conversion to meadows and pastures, and is characteristic of the farms of elderly households in which one or two members "disabled" for agricultural work and, in particular, for farms with "extinguished hearths" belonging to "guest workers" and/or subsistence migrants from poor villages to cities with "the hope of leaving for a brighter urban future"; and

• fourth, in Vojvodina, there is a more present "hunger" for arable land, which conditions the destruction of meadows and pastures, the cultivation of which increases arable land "at any cost" in order to obtain the right of registered agricultural farms to receive subsidies for as large arable land as possible.

As part of the creation of a number of special thematic studies based on the data of the 2012 Census of Agriculture, the Republic Institute of Statistics publishes the study "Agricultural land in the Republic of Serbia" as a special contribution to marking the 2015 - International Year of Soils (2015 International Year of Soils). The importance of the study stems from the fact that the Census of Agriculture 2012 is the most complete census of our agriculture and that it is methodologically harmonized with the census of agriculture in the EU (2010).

Agricultural land is productively and economically the most important category of available land, which represents a practically non-renewable natural resource and a relatively limiting condition for organizing agricultural production, food security and a sustainable future for people.

Analysis of demographic and territorial indicators for the period 1981-2011. shows the changes in the potential labor force and the concentration of consumers of agricultural and food products in Serbia and by region, and in particular points to two key cause-and-effect tendencies:

• a decrease in the total number of inhabitants in Serbia by 542.384 persons or 7,0 percent, which is also characteristic of the regions (at least by 5,1 percent in the Vojvodina Region and at most by 21,0 percent in the South and East Serbia Region) - excluding the Belgrade region where under the influence of the metropolitanization process, the number of inhabitants increased by 12,9 percent; and

• decrease in population in Serbia from 99,6 to 92,6 persons/1 km2, which is also characteristic of the regions (with differences in 2011 between 59,6 persons/1 km2 in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia and 89,4 st./1 km2 in the Region of Vojvodina) – excluding the Belgrade region, which has as many as 513,1 st./1 km2.

Territorial differences in population in Serbia (2011) are even more pronounced by regions (between 33,1 inhabitants/km2 in Zaječarska and 513,1 inhabitants/km2 in Belgrade region or in a ratio of 1 : 15,5 times) and especially by municipalities (from only 5,3 inhabitants/km2 in the demographically devastated Crna Trava to as many as 18.777,7 inhabitants/km2 in the overpopulated Vračar or in relation to 1 : 3523 times).

Available land (own + leased - leased = 5.346.597 ha) makes up 68,9 percent of the total territory of Serbia (7.759.200 ha), and regional differences in its representation range from 94,8 percent in the land-richest Region of Vojvodina , over 78,3 percent in the Belgrade region and 70,4 percent in the Šumadija and Western Serbia region, down to only 44,9 percent in the demographically depopulated Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia.

In the structure of the total available land of all agricultural farms in Serbia (2012), own land dominates (87,8 percent), and the difference is made by "net" leased land (leased - leased).

Family farms (PPG) dominate in Serbia in the total area of ​​available (66,2 percent), own (60,2 percent) and leased land (68,7 percent); while farms of legal entities and entrepreneurs (PGPLP) dominate only in the total land leased (74,4 percent). Despite this, the average area of ​​PPG holdings in available land (5,64 ha) is 108,6 times smaller than the average size of PGPLP holdings (612,33 ha).

Until the adoption of the Law on Agricultural Land (2006), state-owned agricultural land was used by agricultural enterprises (private, social and state) and agricultural cooperatives without payment of compensation. After that, state-owned agricultural land is leased to registered agricultural holdings (RPG), i.e. PPG and PGPLP (at least for one year, most often up to three years, less often for 20 to 40 years if plantations are raised on that land or systems for irrigation and exceptionally for permanent use if the same is translated into state-owned forest land), and its smaller part (5959 ha in the production year 2011/12) without state educational, scientific research, advisory and social institutions used compensation payments.

In the period from the production year 2007/08. until 2013/14. year, the number of local self-government units (LGUs) implementing the program of leasing agricultural land in state ownership increased from 50 to 102 LGUs or by 104 percent, the area of ​​leased land from 179 to 290 thousand hectares or by 62 percent, the average rent from 142,80, 191,60 to 34,2 euros/ha or by 25,6 percent and the total rental value from 49,9 to 94,9 million euros or by 6,4 percent - which represents between 2008 percent (13,5) and 2013 percent of the agricultural budget of Serbia (XNUMX).

In the production year 2011/12. 99 ha of state-owned agricultural land was leased in the territory of 145 out of a total of 261.315 LGUs, of which 72,3 percent were leased by registered PPG, 1,5 percent by cooperatives, and 26,2 percent by other legal entities; at an average rent of 154,66 euros/ha - which ranged from only 5,33 euros/ha in the municipality of Pirot to as much as 442,34 euros/ha in the municipality of Irig. Out of a total of 43 LGUs that did not lease state-owned agricultural land in that year, only two are in AP Vojvodina (Sremski Karlovci and Odzaci), and 41 are in Central Serbia. Considering that there are about 910.000 ha of state-owned agricultural land in Serbia - from which about 460.000 ha of land that cannot be leased should be excluded (village fields and pastures, land in the process of restitution, temporary measures of courts and other state authorities and the difference between cadastral and actual situation on the ground) and the leased area (261.315 ha), it can be concluded that about 170.000 ha of agricultural land in state property, it was not leased out - as a result, the budgets of local self-governments, AP Vojvodina and the Republic of Serbia were damaged by 2012 million euros in 11,6.

Bearing in mind the political, strategic, legal and sectoral consequences for the development of agriculture and especially the fragmented PPGs that make up 99,5 percent of the total number of agricultural holdings in Serbia, it is very indicative that the return of illegally seized property of the cooperative sector in the period from 1953 was excluded from all four previous transitional restitutions (1991, 1992, 2006 and 2011). We especially point out that the land area in the cooperative sector of Serbia was reduced by 1962 ha only in the period from 2012 to 400.000, according to RZS data, which at the price of the sale of land to an investment fund from the United Arab Emirates (12.000 euros/ha) amounts to 4,8 .2012 billion euros! And where is the remaining property that was created by generations of Serbian cooperatives for decades? In the structure of the available land of all agricultural holdings in Serbia (3.861.477), agricultural land dominates (72,2 ha or 49,8 percent of the total available land, i.e. 1.023.036 percent of the total territory), followed by forest land (19,1 ha or 13,2 percent of the total of available land, i.e. 462.084 percent of the total territory), and the least represented is other land (8,7 ha or 6,0 percent of the total available land, i.e. XNUMX percent of the total territory).

The census of agriculture in 2012 revealed for the first time two very worrying facts in the existing public databases on land resources: (1) total agricultural land (3.861.477 ha) is less than half (49,8 percent) of the total territory of Serbia (77.592 km2) ; and Agricultural land 249 (2) not even 424.054 ha or 11,0 percent or every ninth hectare of total agricultural land is unused - which makes 7,9 percent of the total available land of all agricultural holdings or 5,5 percent or every 18th hectare of the total territory Serbia.

PPGs have a more favorable structure of use of available land - characterized by a dominant share of total (84,2 percent) and used agricultural land (79,8 percent), and a significantly smaller share of unused agricultural (4,5 percent), forest (13,2 percent) and other land (2,5 percent); while PGPLP use only 1/3 of the available land for agricultural production, and 2/3 of their land is unused agricultural (14,7 percent), forest (30,7 percent) and other land (20,7 percent).

The total area of ​​unused agricultural land in Serbia is 153.976 or 24,41 percent of the total number of PGs (631.552 PGs), which indicates that over 3/4 of the total number of all PGs treat agricultural land as the most important agrarian natural resource in accordance with the sentence bonus pater familias (good host).

Territorial differences in the representation of unused land in total agricultural land are significant by area (between 1,8 percent in Sremska and 39,2 percent in Pčinjska oblast) and extremely large by municipality (between only 0,2 percent in Vojvodina's Žitište and as much as 75,0 percent in agriculturally neglected and demographically devastated Crna Trava!). The structure of land according to creditworthiness classes contributes significantly to this, since land suitable for cultivation (I-IV creditworthiness class) in the Vojvodina Region makes up as much as 91,0 percent, while their representation in the area of ​​three regions in Central Serbia is only 38,1 percent.

However, with accelerated certification for organic agriculture of 90.000 ha and for planned afforestation with woody flowering plants (acacia, linden and chestnut) 100.000 ha or about 45 percent of the total of 424 thousand hectares of unused agricultural land, Serbia would become a regional leader in the production of organic products and ecological honey with by an annual increase in the value of agricultural production by an additional 381 million euros - which is proportional to the value of more than half of the production of corn, and at the same time more agricultural workers would be employed than in the total production of grain in Serbia.

The calculated indicators of the property structure indicate that the dominant PPG (627.789 PPG or 99,53 percent of the total of 630.742 PG with land) have a smaller average size of the property (5,64 ha of available land - which consists of 4,50 ha of used and 0,25 ha of unused agricultural land, 0,75 ha of forest land and 0,14 ha of other land), while relatively few PGPLP (2953 PGPLP or 0,47 percent of the total number of PG with land) have a significantly larger average holding size (612,33 ha of available land - which consists of 207,37 ha of used and even 90,03 ha of unused agricultural land, 187,95 ha of forest and 126,99 ha of other land). However, the fact that only 960 PGPLP have 265.858 ha or 62,7 percent of the total unused agricultural land in Serbia is of particular concern. This refutes the unargued claim that PPG are more negligent owners than PGPLP and indicates the need for a more comprehensive study of the causes of this situation and the preparation of proposals for measures for the immediate inclusion in the process of agricultural production of very significant unused land resources managed by PGPLP.

The average area of ​​total agricultural land per agricultural holding in Serbia is relatively small (6,12 ha/PG), and the territorial differences are significant by region (between 4,40 ha/PG in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia and 11,42 ha/PG in the Region of Vojvodina or in a ratio of 1 : 2,6 times), even higher by area (from 3,62 ha/PG in Rasinska to 16,13 ha/PG in Central Banat region or in a ratio of 1 : 5,3 times) and very large by municipality (between 0,03 ha/PD in Zvezdara and, probably unexpectedly for most agricultural analysts, as much as 34,47 ha/PD in the agriculturally neglected mountain Crno Trava or in the ratio 1 : 1149 times!).

Territorial differences in the representation of used agricultural land in the total territory are significant by region (between only 25,8 percent in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia to 74,4 percent in the Region of Vojvodina), and are even greater by region (between 27,3 percent in Borska and 82,8 percent in the Central Banat region), and they are particularly expressed by municipalities (from 8,3 percent in Zvezdara to as much as 86,1 percent in two municipalities - Temerin and Zitište).

Observed by macroregions, which in the period before the introduction of statistical regions were common in territorial analyzes in Serbia, Central Serbia still dominates in the structure of the total available land (61,7 percent) and all analyzed categories of land use (66,5 percent of the total, 63,2, 82,9 percent of used and, unfortunately, 85,7 percent of unused agricultural land, as well as 62,0 percent of forest land and XNUMX percent of other land).

The dominant share of used agricultural land in the total available land in Serbia (64,3 percent) is characteristic of all regions, with the fact that its representation is significantly higher in the Vojvodina Region (78,5 percent), and in all three regions in Central Serbia significantly below the national average (from 53,8 percent in Belgrade to 57,5 percent in the South and East Serbia Region).

The area of ​​total agricultural (0,54 ha) and used agricultural land per inhabitant (0,48 ha) is relatively satisfactory for the food self-sustainability of the population in Serbia. However, the relatively high provision of total and used agricultural land per inhabitant is, unfortunately, a consequence of a significant decrease in the total number of inhabitants in Serbia - by 336 thousand persons or by 4,5 percent in the period 2002-2012. year! Despite certain methodological differences between regular statistical reports (1960-2012) and the Census of Agriculture 2012, changes in the available land area indicate a distinctly dynamic tendency to decrease the total agricultural and especially the most productive arable land in Serbia, namely: • by 299 thousand hectares of agricultural land of land, i.e. for 275 thousand hectares of arable land according to regular statistical reports in the period 1960-2012. year.; • for 1,620 million hectares of agricultural land, i.e. for 1,110 million hectares of arable land according to the regular statistical report for 2012 and the Census of Agriculture 2012; and • for 1,917 million hectares of agricultural land, i.e. for 1,386 million hectares of arable land according to the regular statistical report for 1960 and the 2012 Census of Agriculture.

Due to the inappropriate relationship between owners and users of land, on the one hand, and the state and society, on the other hand, in the period 1960-2012. 1,493 million hectares or 27,84 percent of used agricultural land was "exempted" from Serbian agriculture - the turnover value of which is 7,5 billion euros!

Analysis of the ownership structure of two basic groups of agricultural holdings, according to the Census of Agriculture 2012, indicates the following findings:

• PPG traditionally dominate more in the total number of farms (99,5 percent) than in KPZ (82,2 percent), but with a very small average holding area (4,55 ha);

• PGPLP are minor in number (0,5 percent), and in terms of participation in KPZ (17,8 percent) and especially in terms of average property area (204,12 ha), they are significant production and economic entities in Serbian agriculture; and

• there is a relatively large share of PGPLP without land (23,2 percent) According to the 2012 Agriculture Census, for the first time in Serbia (after World War II), a significant number of PPG was recorded in property groups that were previously reserved exclusively for PGPLP (state and social agricultural enterprises and agricultural cooperatives). This subgroup of 18.561 PPGs, i.e. transitional winners in the period between the IPG census in 2002 and the PPG census in 2012, consists of 17.187 PPGs with productively respectable holdings (20-100 ha) and, in particular, even European competitive 1374 PPGs - with holdings of 100 ha to, a decade ago unimaginable, 2500 ha.

A comparative analysis of the ownership structure of all PGs in Serbia (2012) and farms in the EU-28 (2010) indicates the following findings:

• all PGs in Serbia (631.522 PGs) make up a relatively significant 5,16 percent of the total number of farms in the EU-28, which ranks our country in a high seventh place behind the leading position of Romania (3.859.000 PGs) and five other EU members with a larger number farms (Italy, Poland, Spain, Greece and Hungary);

• from the available 3.437.423 ha of KPZ, Serbia makes up 1,97 percent of the KPZ of the EU-28, according to which our country ranks 12th "in the upper zone of the golden mean", behind the leading position of France (27.837.300 ha) and other 11 EU members with a significantly larger (Spain, United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, Romania, Italy) and slightly larger area of ​​KPZ (Ireland, Hungary, Portugal and Greece);

• the relatively small holding size of all PGs in Serbia (5,44 ha KPZ) is 2,6 times smaller than the average farm size in the EU-28, which ranks our country only in 24th place - far behind the leading position of the Czech Republic (125,4 ha/PG), and ahead of only four members with very small farms (< 5 ha/PG: Greece, Cyprus, Romania and Malta);• there is no essential difference in the concentration of the number of PGs and their KPZ in ownership groups "up to 2 ha" between the EU-28 (49,14 percent of farms that have only 2,47 percent of KPZ) and Serbia (48,12 percent of farms that have 7,70 percent of KPZ), which indicates the importance and need for the sustainability of small PPGs in our country as well; KPZ) and Serbia (only 0,3 percent of farms which have at their disposal 23,8 percent of KPZ); and

• however, it is curious to note that the average size of PG holdings of the largest holding groups ("50-100 ha" and ">100 ha") in Serbia is larger (analogously by 0,71 ha or by 1,0 percent and by as much as 158,71, 59,2 ha or by 28 percent) than in the EU-100, which is the result of the influence of three ownership groups of larger PPGs that are "transition winners" ("500-500 ha, "1000-1000 ha" and "2500-100 ha") and especially privatized former social and remaining social enterprises "under restitution", as well as state farms in the five largest ownership groups of PGPLP ("500-500 ha", "1000-1000 ha', '2500-2500 ha', '5000-5000 ha' and '>180 ha') - which can be potentially competitive not not only European but also farms in the export strongest agribusinesses of the world (USA - about two million farms with an average size of XNUMX ha).

Despite the differences in the definition of IPG (1960) and PPG (2012) and the coverage of the last two "complete" censuses in Serbia, the analysis of 52-year changes in the ownership structure of IPG and PPG indicates that the following tendencies were manifested:

• a significant reduction in the total number of IPG/PPG (by 361.169 farms or by as much as 36,5 percent) and their total used land area (by 1,516.432 ha or by 34,9 percent), which means that every third PPG in Serbia has been "closed" ; and

• the decrease in the number of IPG/PPG is also characteristic for both macroregions, but with mutually different dynamics and the prevailing tendency: - an absolutely greater and relatively smaller decrease in the number of PPG in Central Serbia (by 199.474 farms or by 29,3 percent) and a marked decrease in the area of ​​used of land (for 1,611.396 ha or as much as 49,4 percent) - which determines the process of pauperization of PPG; and Census of Agriculture 2012.

252 - by an absolutely smaller but relatively more dynamic reduction in the number of PPGs in AP Vojvodina (by 161.775 farms or by as much as 52,5 percent), but with an increase in the available area of ​​used land (by 94.964 ha or by 8,8 percent) - which is the result of an increase in leased land of state-owned agricultural land and the purchase of agricultural land from elderly and non-agricultural households in order to farm medium and larger PPGs.

With a note, also, about the differences in the definition of IPG (2002) and PPG (2012) and in the scope of their lists, the analysis of changes in the ownership structure of IPG/PPG during this transitional decade indicates the following findings:

• significant dynamics of reduction in the number of PPG (by as many as 150.339 farms or by 19,3 percent), with a simultaneous reduction in the area of ​​used land - but of a significantly smaller volume and intensity (by 50.455 ha or by 1,8 percent);

• the decrease in the number of PPGs is characteristic of both macroregions, but with different scope and intensity: for 95.133 PPGs or 16,5 percent in Central Serbia and for 55.206 PPGs or even 27,4 percent in Vojvodina;

• the decrease in the number of PPG is present in all ownership groups in Serbia and in both macroregions, except for two antipodean ownership groups - landless and transitional beneficiaries ("over 20 ha");

• the process of socio-economic stratification of the two Antipodean ownership groups is more pronounced in the more agriculturally developed area of ​​Vojvodina - where an increase of as much as 69,4 percent of the landless was recorded, on the one hand, and an increase of as much as 4,4 times of transitional beneficiaries (">20 ha" ), on the other hand.

Regional differences in the ownership structure of PPG (2012) are reflected in the following findings for three of their ownership subgroups:

• small farms ("up to 5 ha") are dominant in the total number of PPGs in all regions (between 66,2 percent in the Vojvodina Region and 83,7 percent in the Belgrade Region) and are the most represented in the total KPZ in two regions (43,4 percent in the Belgrade Region and 46,7 percent in the South and East Serbia Region), while in the Šumadija and West Serbia Region they are in second place (41,8 percent), and in the Vojvodina Region they have only 11,8 percent of KPZ available;

• medium-sized farms ("5-20 ha") are between small and large in terms of representation in the number of PPGs in all regions (between 15,1 percent in Belgrade and 21,5 percent in the Sumadija and Western Serbia Regions) and in terms of representation in KPZ in three regions (between 24,9 percent in the Vojvodina Region and 42,2 percent in the South and East KPZ Region; and

• large farms ("over 20 ha") are the least represented in the total number of PPGs in all regions (between 0,98 percent in the South and East Serbia Region to 9,2 percent in the Vojvodina Region) and are the least represented in KPZ in three regions (between 8,6 percent in the Šumadija Region and Western Serbia and 17,6 percent in the Belgrade Region), while in the Vojvodina Region they are even dominant in the KPZ (63,27 percent).

In this study, for the first time in our agro-economic and literature on agricultural censuses, an analysis of the ownership structure of 13 listed legal forms of organization in five subgroups of PGPLP was carried out, which indicates the following findings:

• there is a large representation of farms "without land" in all five PLP subgroups (23,2 percent), ranging from at least 5,9 percent in PGs of state and local self-government bodies (ODLS), over 21,3 percent in agricultural enterprises ( PP), 23,1 percent in PG of other legal entities and entrepreneurs (OPLP) and 28,0 percent in agricultural cooperatives (ZZ), up to 35,2 percent in PG of public enterprises and institutions (JPU);

• the participation of PGPLP in KPZ is significantly higher than in the number of all PGs, especially agricultural enterprises (0,20 percent of all PGs and 9,53 percent of total KPZs) and state and local self-government bodies (only 0,03 percent of all PGs and 6,0 percent of the total KPZ) - which together have 87,1 percent of the total KPZ of all PLPs; and

• there are very significant differences in the average property area of ​​PGPLP, which ranges from 9,53 ha for other legal entities and entrepreneurs to as much as 1.106,38 ha for state bodies and local self-governments, or in a ratio of 1:116 times.

Regional differences in the number of PGPLP and their KPZ in Serbia (2012) point to the following findings:

• The region of Vojvodina is the most represented in terms of the number of farms (1355 farms or 45,2 percent of the PGPLP) and dominant in the KPZ (431.632 ha or even 70,49 percent of the KPZ PLP);

• The region of Šumadija and Western Serbia is in second place in terms of the number of farms (1005 farms or 33,5 percent of PGPLP) and in third place in terms of KPZ (68.755 ha or 11,23 percent of KPZ PLP);

• The region of Southern and Eastern Serbia is in third place in terms of the number of farms (513 farms or 17,10 percent of PGPLP) but also in second place in terms of KPZ (80.542 ha or 13,15 percent of KPZ PLP); while it is

• The Belgrade region is at the bottom of all four regions, with only 127 farms or 4,23 percent of PGPLP, which dispose of 31.426 ha or 5,13 percent of the total KPZ PLP.

The ownership structure of PGPLP was affected by numerous and significant organizational and ownership changes, the focus of which was the transformation of social property as a form of "parastate" property characteristic only for the SFRY (until 1991) and for the FRY (1992-2006) and in relapses retained in non-privatized social agricultural enterprises, and partially also in the composition of properties used by agricultural cooperatives even after its elimination as a constitutional category under the Constitution of the RS (2006). Contrary to the lex specialis of the Law on the Conversion of Social Property on Agricultural Land into Other Forms of Property (1992), in practice there are no known examples of the conversion of social property over agricultural land into state and/or cooperative property. At the same time, the demarcation of ownership of agricultural land in agricultural enterprises and agricultural cooperatives was carried out to the detriment of the cooperatives - which were also excluded from the restitution process - which is why they became the biggest transitional losers.

Finally, the ownership structure of PGPLP was also affected by: the sale of parts of individual PGs in the process of realizing bank mortgages on agricultural land, the expropriation of part of PG's possessions for infrastructural and other general social needs, as well as new sales between legitimate "transitional speculators" and subsequent buyers of their agricultural land . Finally, we should especially expect that changes in the ownership and ownership structure of PG will be even more dynamic in the coming period, because from September 2017, according to the SAA, economically richer buyers from the EU-28 acquire the right to buy agricultural land (and other real estate) in Serbia under under the same conditions as domestic economically devastated potential customers. The best way to protect national interests in terms of maintaining ownership of agricultural land is to adopt a new Law on Agricultural Land and to incorporate into it all the restrictions on acquiring ownership of agricultural land that exist in the EU-28 member states.

Analysis of the structure of KPZ in Serbia (2012) indicates that PPGs are dominant in the total KPZ (2.852.068 ha or 82,2 percent of KPZ) and in all three collective categories of its use - but with different levels of representation: 99,3 percent of permanent plantations, 85,4 .67,6 percent of arable land and 25 percent of meadows and pastures. The dominant participation of PPG in KPZ is characteristic in all 62,0 areas (between 98,8 percent in Pirotska and 162 percent in Mačvanska region), as well as in 165 out of a total of 77,8 municipalities in which KPZ is recorded - because in three municipalities PGPLP dominates: municipalities Palilula (55,4 percent) and Apatin (75,6 percent) - which are characterized by large estates of the PP, as well as the municipality of Crna Trava (2012 percent) - where large areas of meadows and pastures are owned by a non-agrarian public company and state and local self-government bodies. Agricultural Census XNUMX.

Analysis of the structure of KPZ by types of agricultural holdings shows that:

• arable areas dominant in all PG (73,8 percent of KPZ) and in both types of PG - above average in PPG (76,7 percent of KPZ) and below average in PGPLP (60,4 percent of KPZ);

• meadows and pastures are in second place in terms of representation on all PGs (20,7 percent of KPZ), but with a lower representation on PPG (17,1 percent of KPZ) and significantly higher representation on PGPLP (37,7 percent of KPZ); while they are

• permanent plantings are the least represented on all PGs (5,5 percent of KPZ), but with an above-average participation on PPG (6,2 percent) and a relatively small participation on PGPLP (1,9 percent of KPZ).

Regional analysis of the KPZ structure indicates that arable land dominates in all regions (from 52,2 percent in the Šumadija and Western Serbia Region to 91,5 percent in the Vojvodina Region), followed by pastures and meadows with a significantly smaller share (from 7,1 percent in the Region of Vojvodina up to 37,9 percent in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia), while permanent plantings are the least represented (only 1,4 percent in the Region of Vojvodina up to 9,9 percent in Belgrade and Šumadija Region and Western Serbia).

In particular, it should be noted that in the total number of PGs in Serbia (2012), 16,4 percent of farms do not have arable land, 48,2 percent of farms do not have permanent crops, and even 57,1 percent of farms do not have meadows and pastures, which conditions the representation of three branches of agricultural production: arable and vegetable growing on farms with arable land, fruit growing and viticulture on farms with permanent crops, and animal husbandry on farms with meadows and pastures.

The structure of arable land in Serbia (2.536.881 ha or 73,8 percent of the KPZ) is determined by:

• traditionally small area of ​​homesteads (23.277 ha) and their symbolic participation in KPZ (0,7 percent) and in arable land (0,9 percent); and

• significant area of ​​arable land and gardens (2,513.154 ha) and their dominant share in the KPZ (73,1 percent) and especially in arable land (99,1 percent).

Considering the importance and tradition of the homestead for households living on the PPG, it is very indicative that even 186.968 or 46,1 percent of the PPG do not have a homestead, which indicates that these are farms where the "hearths are extinguished" and that household members live in urban areas of Serbia, either they are temporarily working abroad and saving the farm for returning to their homeland after retirement, or they have permanently moved abroad - and they have not yet alienated their agricultural farm.

In particular, it should be noted that the 2012 Census of Agriculture, for the first time in the history of our previous agricultural censuses and regular statistical reports, stated that the dominant part (58,3 percent) of the total arable land and gardens in Serbia is located in the Vojvodina Region.

In relation to the average share of arable land in KPZ in Serbia (73,8 percent), territorial differences range from only 21,3 percent in Zlatiborska to 95,9 percent in Južnobačka oblast - in whose areas there are also municipalities with minor (3,9, 99,5 percent in the municipality of Čajetina) and the highest representation of arable land (as much as XNUMX percent in the municipality of Bački Petrovac).

Analyzing the arable area (0,20 ha/inhabitant) as an indicator of the nutritional sustainability of the population in Serbia at the current technical and technological level of agricultural production - with certain deviations depending on the class and other qualitative characteristics of each plot and production structure, it is necessary to point out that self-sufficiency in they cannot provide food in eight out of a total of 25 areas (Belgrade - 0,07 ha/inhabitant, Raška - 0,10 ha/inhabitant, Nišavska - 0,16 ha/inhabitant, Zlatiborska, Pirotska and Pčinjska - 0,17 ha/inhabitant each, and Moravička and Jablanička regions - 0,19 ha/inhabitant each) and 47 out of a total of 165 municipalities (nine municipalities in the Belgrade region, three municipalities in the Region of Vojvodina, 16 municipalities in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia and 19 municipalities in the Region of Southern and Eastern Serbia).

Permanent plantings are the least represented aggregate category of KPZ not only in Serbia (5,4 percent of KPZ - of which 4,8 percent are orchards, then 0,6 percent vineyards and only 0,1 percent other plantings), but also on the properties of both groups farms (6,2 percent of the PPG KPZ and only 1,9 percent of the PGPLP KPZ) and in all four regions (from 1,4 percent of the KPZ in the Vojvodina Region to 9,9 percent of the KPZ in Belgrade and in the Region of Šumadija and Western Serbia), but with territorially significant differences by area (from 0,47 percent of the KPZ in Central Banat to 19,88 percent in the Toplicka region) and extremely large differences by municipality (from only 0,2 percent of the KPZ in Kovačica) up to 66,8 percent of KPZ in Grocka - where the dominant part of the owners and users of agricultural land specialized in fruit-growing production).

In relation to arable areas and areas of permanent crops, the areas of meadows and pastures were the least subject of agro-economic and statistical analyses, for two reasons:

• firstly, due to the reduction in the number of livestock, especially cattle, sheep and goats, meadows as a source of bulk food (hay, hay and silage) and pastures for seasonal grazing of livestock lost their importance, and no attention is paid to their melioration for sustainable use, protection and arrangement due diligence;

• secondly, meadows and pastures are generally located on qualitatively weaker soil classes (IV, V, VI, VI and VIII) in hilly-mountainous and marshy or floodplain areas and they are very rarely the subject of purchase, and for relatively low prices.

The analysis of indicators on meadows and pastures indicates the following findings:

• in the structure of KPZ in Serbia, meadows and pastures make up 20,8 percent - in which meadows are more common (11,1 percent) than pastures (9,7 percent); • in the structure of meadows and pastures in Serbia, meadows dominate (53,5 percent) compared to pastures (46,5 percent);

• in the structure of meadows and pastures by type of farms, meadows dominate on PPG holdings (72,4 percent), and pastures on PGPLP holdings (86,1 percent); • PPG are more represented in the collective category of meadows and pastures (67,6 percent) and the area of ​​meadows (91,6 percent), and PGPLP in the area of ​​pastures (59,9 percent);

• in the total number of all PGs that have meadows and pastures (266.813 PGs), meadows are owned or used by 92,7 percent of PGs, and pastures by 37,0 percent of PGs.

There are very significant territorial differences in the participation of meadows and pastures in KPZ by districts (from 2,1 percent in Severnobanatska to 69,6 percent in Zaječarska oblast) and municipalities (from only 0,1 percent in Bački Petrovac to as much as 90,9 percent in Čajetina ).

Considering the research results in this study based on the 2012 Census of Agriculture, it is necessary for the RSO to subsequently correct the results of regular annual reports on KPZ and categories of its use for the period before 2012.

Thanks to the richness of the 2012 Agricultural Census database, this study can also serve as a "model" for the preparation of special studies on agricultural land for lower levels of territorial units (25 districts, 168 municipalities and 4721 settlements) in the Republic of Serbia.

Based on the findings stated in individual chapters of this study, as well as other available thematic analyzes on agricultural land, it is necessary in the agrarian and rural policy of Serbia to attach greater importance to land policy and provide more funds for better protection, more complete arrangement and more rational use of agricultural land, as natural and production resources for the improvement of agriculture and overall economic development of our country.

(Agricultural land, study by prof. Dr. Miladin M. Ševarlić )