The European Union is the most complex and by any aspect the most unique example of a regionaleconomic integration. Its origin, evolution and survival are based on a common legislative andinstitutional framework. The so-called common policies implemented in a number of economicand non-economic areas are particularly distinctive. Most of them are implemented on two levels:national and communal. The only common policy that is fully implemented at the European Unionlevel is the Community Agrarian Policy (CAP), whereas the agriculture has the highest expenditurein the communal budget. The function of CAP is primarily economic as its goals are strictly relatedto economic issues: price stability of agricultural products, productivity growth, higher wages forthe farmers, etc. The CAP strengthens the Union's social cohesion, which is of utmost importancein times of constant crises, BREXIT and other extreme instabilities. For this reason, the CAP hasbeen in the processes of continuous reforms (MacShary, Mansholt and those of recent times) fordecades, in order to increase its efficiency and justify enormous financial investments. The CAPresults depend on the achievement of preset objectives and the exchange of agricultural productsand food that the European Union generates globally. It has been demonstrated that the CAP is asignificant common policy, both in achieving economic goals and in the sphere of strengtheningcommunal cohesion.
Od 1990. godine, čitav region Istočne i Jugoistočne Evrope počeo je sa transformacijom svojih ekonomija iz centralno planskog sistema u tržišni, što se označava pojmom tranzicija. Postavka istraživačke studije je sagledavanje stanja sektora poljoprivrede Republike Srbije i Bosne i Hercegovine, koji su prošli kroz proces ekonomske tranzicije. Ideja tranzicije privrede, odnosno poljoprivrede je rast proizvodnje i BDP, povećanje efikasnosti i ostvarivanje boljih proizvodno-ekonomskih performansi. Cilj istraživanja je utvrditi da li je i u kojoj meri tranzicija poljoprivrede dovela do njenog razvoja, koji su propusti napravljeni i kakve mere agrarne politike kreirati u funkciji daljeg razvoja poljoprivrede i ruralnih područja. U izvođenju vrednosnih sudova i kritičkih zapažanja celokupnog procesa tranzicije agrosektora korišćene su određene naučne metode poput naučnog studiranja, indikatori, grafički metod, statistički metod, deskriptivna analiza i sinteza, komparatvini metod i drugi naučni metodi. Strategija poljoprivredne tranzicije u bivšim socijalističkim zemljama imala je za cilj poboljšanje efikasnosti i produktivnosti poljoprivrede zamenom institucionalnih i organizacionih karakteristika komandne ekonomije sa atributima pozajmljenim iz prakse tržišne ekonomije. Transformacija od kolektivne do efikasnije individualizovane poljoprivrede (privatizacija), koja će ostvarivati veći nivo prihoda je krajnji cilj. Tranziciju poljoprivrede prati nepovoljna vlasnička struktura i niska produktivnost, neefikasnost agrarne politike, spor razvoj institucija podrške, neadekvatan zakonodavni okvir i neuspešna privatizacija. Proces privatizacije obeležen je sa mnogo kontroverzi i zloupotreba, pa je i to imalo negativan odraz na ukupne efekte. Pored nabrojanog, efekti tranzicije poljoprivrede se ogledaju i u smanjenom obimu investicija, padu stočarske proizvodnje, spoljnotrgovinska razmena uglavnom sirovina i proizvoda niskog stepena finalizacije, depopulaciji sela, nepovoljnoj agrarnoj strukturi, malim pomacima na planu podiznja konkurentnosti i produktivnosti i nekonzistentnoj agrarnoj politici. Ni poljoprivredno zadrugarstvo nije revitalizovano, a kamoli ostvarilo neki značajan uspeh, tim pre, jer nije vraćeno poljuljano poverenje u zadružni oblik organizovanja, niti su zadružni principi usvojeni. Prelazak na tržišnu ekonomiju ostavio je Srbiju i Bosnu i Hercegovinu daleko iza najuspešnijih zemalja Centralne i Istočne Evrope. BiH zaostaje po mnogim pitanjima vezanim za strukturne reforme, koje su pratile ekonomsku tranziciju zemalja u regionu. U Republici Srbiji je stanje nešto bolje, ali svakako ispod očekivanja i s velikim kašnjenjima, pa su samim tim pozitivni efekti značajno slabiji. Stanje u BiH u posttranzicionom periodu je takvo da nedostaje institucionalna podrška i podsticajne mere agrarne politike na svim nivoima, počev od države preko kantona i opština, a tržišne reforme poljoprivrednog sektora nailaze na probleme i zastoje. Tranzicija poljoprivrede u BiH nije donela očekivane efekte, s obzirom da nije modernizovana, niti je zasnovana na efikasnosti, konkurentnosti, intenzivnosti i tržišnosti. Nešto bolja situacija je u Republici Srbiji, ali svakako nije razvijen sektor poljoprivrede, niti su u potpunosti ostvareni zacrtani ciljevi tranzicije. ; Since 1990, the entire region of Eastern and Southeastern Europe has begun to transform its economies from the central planning system to the marketplace, which is referred to as the concept of transition. The research study setting is to look at the state of the agriculture sector of the Republic of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which went through the process of economic transition. The idea of a transition of the economy, that is agriculture, is the growth of production and GDP, increasing efficiency and achieving better productioneconomic performance. The aim of the research is to determine whether and to what extent the transition of agriculture has led to its development, what omissions have been made and what measures of agrarian policy are to be created in the function of further development of agriculture and rural areas. Certain scientific methods such as scientific study, indicators, graphic method, statistical method, descriptive analysis and synthesis, comparative methods and other scientific methods have been used in performing value judgments and critical observations of the whole process of transition of agrosectors. The agricultural transition strategy in the former socialist countries aimed to improve the efficiency and productivity of agriculture by replacing the institutional and organizational characteristics of the command economy with attributes borrowed from the practice of a market economy. Transformation from collective to more efficient individualized agriculture (privatization), which will achieve higher level of income is the ultimate goal. The transition to agriculture is accompanied by an unfavorable ownership structure and low productivity, inefficiency of agrarian policy, slow development of support institutions, inadequate legislative framework and unsuccessful privatization. The privatization process was marked with a lot of controversy and abuse, which also had a negative impact on the overall effects. In addition to the above, the effects of agriculture transition are reflected in the reduced volume of investments, the decline in livestock production, the foreign trade of mostly raw materials and products of low level of finalization, depopulation of the village, unfavorable agrarian structure, small shifts in raising competitiveness and productivity and inconsistent agricultural policy. Even agricultural cooperatives were not revitalized, let alone achieved some significant success, the sooner because no shattered confidence in the cooperative form of organization was returned, nor cooperative principles were adopted. The transition to the market economy left Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina far behind the most successful countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina lags behind many issues related to structural reforms, which have followed the economic transition of countries in the region. In the Republic of Serbia, the situation is somewhat better, but certainly below expectations and with big delays, so the positive effects are significantly weaker. The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the post-transition period is such that institutional support and incentive measures of agrarian policy at all levels, starting from the state through cantons and municipalities, are lacking, and market reforms of the agricultural sector are facing problems and delays. The transit of agriculture in Bosnia and Herzegovina did not produce the expected effects, as it was not modernized nor based on efficiency, competitiveness, intensity and marketability. There is a somewhat better situation in the Republic of Serbia, but the agriculture sector is certainly not developed, and the goals of transition have not been fully met.
The ownership structure is one of the determining factors in the development of all agricultures; Croatia's is not an exception to this rule. I the long run, the ownership structure is undoubtedly going to determine the direction of the development of the market-oriented Croatian agriculture. The process of building the ownership structure appropriate to the market economy is neither simple not fast, let alone cheap. An overnight change in the ownership structure is neither possible nor prudent. The existing ownership structure of Croatian agriculture is the result of a century and a half long historical development. Socio-economic and political factors exerted a strong influence onthe process of the ownership structure's formation. Today Croatia has an "atomized" estate of only 2.9 hectares. A century ago the average size of estates was 8 hectares. This fragmentation is a direct result of the agrarian reform and colonization in the second Yugoslavia when the land maximum was reduced to 10 hectares. The existing - very unfavorable structure - should be in the transitional period gradually adapted to the family economy as the basis of future development, which will be market-oriented, cost-effective, and profitable. (SOI : PM: S. 238)
The Republic of Serbia has already missed several historical chances to join the European Union but is currently in a a position to define and accelerate the process leading to a united Europe, and therefore confirming that it historically, economically, regionally and culturally belongs to the European family of nations. Accession to the EU is one of the most important goals of modern Serbia which realization Serbia will become an organized state, gain political stability and provide intensive economic development. Defining the development strategy of Serbia to join European Union includes the necessary political conditions (stability of democracy and its institutions, respect for fundamental human and minority rights), economic conditions (the existence of a functioning market economy that is able to withstand the pressure of competition in the internal market of the European Union) as well as administrative requirements (the ability of future members to take and apply the primary and secondary EU legislation and to implement the aims of political, economic and monetary union). Joining single market of the European Union opens up opportunities for marketing of domestic products and services, where it should be noted that the export of our companies in the EU amounts to over 50% of total domestic exports. This proves that the European Union is traditionally the most important export market for Serbia. Therefore, the integration of Serbia into the European Union is viewed as the headquarters of growth of the Serbian economy through the growth of export of domestic products to the EU market. The most positive effects are measurable in the area of agriculture, where our country has a surplus in agricultural trade with the EU. Serbia has preferential status for 90% of agricultural products, which should be taken advantage of, so that agrarian reform is going in the direction of maximum increase in production until joining the EU. There are also great chances in car industry, where most of the commercial reorientation is done under the auspices of the European Agreement.
