PAUN ION OTIMAN, COSMIN SALASAN Romanian Academy – Branch of Timişoara, Research Centre for Sustainable Rural Development of Romania

 agricultural households <1ha represents 44% of total, but less than 8% of the total area  50% of the private individual farms have 1-10 ha, and only 2.19% have ha  For the farms with legal status, the size category 1-10 ha, represents less than one third of the total number, less than 20% are between 10 and 100 ha, while the last category accounting farms with more than 100 ha has over 40% of total and covers more than 95% of the total area

Size (ha) Number of farmsArea (hectares) Individual private farms Farms w. legal status Individual private farms Farms w. legal status < 0, ,310,68 0,1 - 0, ,2887,56 0,3 - 0, ,18123,28 0,5 – ,05380,01 1 – ,601207,35 2 – ,367050,04 5 – , ,65 10 – , ,69 20 – ,379468,86 30 – , ,77 50 – , ,79 > , ,26 Percentages < 143,928,187,240,01 1 – 1053,7331,1968,860,48 10 – 502,1912,6215,150,99 50 – 1000,096,932,721,86 > 1000,0641,086,0496,65

 The farms with less than one hectare that do not qualify for direct payments amount private farms and farms with legal status covering an area of ha  The total number of farms having more than 1 ha is  Over three years, from 2007 to 2009, the total number of direct payments decreased by farms out of which households of less than 5 ha

 In 2010, holdings belonged to the SSH category of 2-8 ESU.  Out of those, households are headed by people of 65 years of age or more.  At the same time, the households with less than 2 ESU amount among which are owned by persons of 65 years and above.

 The physical size of the farms could be of less relevance, especially for the relatively small ones, as the production type and the level of production intensification can change the economic size of farms. is given free of any charge for farming  Related to the property aspects, over 90% of the total land area is registered into ownership and about 8% covers different forms of rent. About 1/3 of this area under rent is given free of any charge for farming

 Without the certitude of the pre-accession effects mainly given the lack of coherence in agricultural policy before and during that time horizon, farms, with or without legal status, disappeared during two years before the accession moment

 Out of the total employment, thousand people, almost one fourth (2,22 million) are represented by farmers and qualified workers in agriculture, forestry and fishery  40% of active people in agriculture have 55 years or over  people were released from the farming activity, 97% of them being former temporary employees. The largest part of these came from the farms with less than 10 ha, and the effect was four times higher for the class 1-10 ha than for the class with less than 1 ha

 Total number of farms ,  99,54% in individual private farms and 0,45% in farms with legal status,  Represented a work place for people, 98,92% on individual private farms and 1% on farms with legal status.

 A total of people had the status of employees:  temporary employees (98,47%),  permanent employees (1,12%) and  farm heads (0,39%).  This situation allows the consideration of work places as permanent employment, which represents only 1,5% of the total employment in the agricultural sector

 In terms of expenditure and self-consumption, in national average the employees have a share of 92% cash expenditure in their total expenses structure while the farmers only amount 52,7%, the rest of 47,3% being represented be the equivalent self-consumption  households are consuming more than half of their own production representing 80,7% of total holdings. At the same time households (or 85,6%) consuming more than 50% of their production have less than 1 ESU

 Based on household characteristics, farm characteristics, behavioural characteristics, characteristics of the external environment and viability, the major types of semi-subsistence households are:  Rural diversifiers,  Rural pensioners,  Farmers,  Rural newcomers  Rural newcomers. The five characteristics are supported by 72 variables

 Rural diversifiers  Rural diversifiers have the highest level of formal education, the highest absolute annual non-farm income, and the highest share of non- farm income in household net income (65.8%). The agricultural production is 2/3 self- consumed having the lowest the share of farm net income in household net income (16.7%). Among the four types, the rural diversifiers have the largest number of produced agricultural goods with the smallest level of purchased inputs in animal production.

 Rural pensioners  Rural pensioners have the highest age of the household head and a long experience in managing the farm low formal education. They have the lowest farm net income and also the lowest annual household net income. Almost 2/3 of their production is self-consumed. The households are the smallest farms both in economic size and cultivated agricultural area. 2/3 of the products are issued by the animal production and the usage of purchased inputs is the highest.

 The farmers  The farmers have the highest level of agricultural qualification and a high experience in managing the farm. The share of farm net income in household net income is by 1/3 higher than previous two categories. The absolute farm net income is the highest of the sample. The commercial orientation of the household is proved by the lowest share of own used agricultural production in total agricultural production.

 The farmers…  The farmers… more than 1/5 of these households are headed by women. The farms are the largest in both, economic size and agricultural area. These households have the highest share of crop production in total agricultural production and a low number of agricultural products (10 products). Moreover, they achieve the highest yields cereals. With a low use of purchased inputs for animal production per unit of animal production, these households also achieve the highest milk performance

 Rural newcomers  Rural newcomers have the lowest age among the farm operators, the least experience in managing the farm and the lowest level of formal education. They produce mainly for the market and have a low share of own used agricultural production in total agricultural production, while the share of farm net income in household net income is high. These households have the lowest household's cash balance of all, indicating the lack of ability to derive sufficient income from farming or from other income sources.

 The National Rural Development Programme in Romania allocates as public expenditure Euro and establishes as achievement indicator to support semi- subsistence farms, wrongly as a maximum of SSH can be financed out of that amount  Until October 2011, projects in total were approved for financing for a total amount of Euro

flexibility  Semi-subsistence households have the flexibility to slightly increase their production level conversion  Policy support in favor of commercial conversion of SSH in not effective or not in place education  The education level of the SSH heads is poor and their management is based mainly on practical experience

reservoir  The smallest farms (bellow 10 ha) act as a growth reservoir, generally, but also for those moving out of semi-subsistence slight  A slight transition from semi-subsistence to commercial dimensions is expected under the current conditions and the Romanian specificities, however not due to the policy instruments intervention

agri-culture social value  The social dimension of the subsistence and semi-subsistence are part of the agri-culture and should also be treated as a social value instead of transferring it completely from EAFRD to ESF