KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
LOCAL FOOD SYSTEM IN LITHUANIA
Indre Butiene
Klaipeda University, faculty of Health Sciences
Lina Sakiene
Klaipeda University, faculty of Health Sciences
Roze Perminiene
Klaipeda University, faculty of Health Sciences
Natalja Istomina
Klaipeda University, faculty of Health Sciences
Klaipeda, 2013
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
Content
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2
1. Common characteristics including common opportunities and threats in the production of local
and regional foods ........................................................................................................................................ 3
1.1. Average size (in hectares and animal heads) of the producer of primary local/regional food
(LRF) in Lithuania ....................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1.
Data regarding types and amounts of LRF produced in Lithuania in 2011 ................................... 4
1.1.1.
Livestock farming .................................................................................................................. 5
1.1.2.
Milk........................................................................................................................................ 6
1.1.3.
Production of dairy products ................................................................................................ 6
1.1.4.
Crop production .................................................................................................................... 7
1.1.5.
Fishery ................................................................................................................................... 9
1.2.
Distribution of Lithuanian food processing companies of small, mid and large-size (2011)
10
1.3.
Main distribution channels of LRF............................................................................................... 11
1.4. Types of common labels and/or marketing systems (indicating that the food is locally
produced) ............................................................................................................................................... 12
1.5.
2.
3.
Trends (in last 5 years) in LRF production in Lithuania ........................................................ 13
Local cuisines in Lithuania, regional analysis ...................................................................................... 14
2.1.
Restaurants serving LRF Lithuania (2011) ............................................................................. 14
2.2.
Benefits of serving of LRF in restaurants in Lithuania ........................................................... 14
2.3.
Types of meals made using LRF which are served in Lithuania ............................................ 15
2.4.
Opportunities and challenges accompanied with serving LRF at Lithuanian restaurant? .. 15
Local food producers’ perceptions of threats and opportunities in local food production ............... 17
3.2. Conclusions of strategic analysis of the agriculture of Lithuania: agricultural strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis. ................................................................. 18
4.
Local consumers’ perceptions of the benefits of local food ............................................................... 20
References................................................................................................................................................... 22
1
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
Local food system in Lithuania
Introduction
Growing demand for food in the world, the need for the rational use of the available natural
resources and the much needed preservation for future generations, pressure Lithuania as a country to
re-evaluate the role of agriculture and its importance. Agriculture and its production processing industry
are not only an important source of economic prosperity through offering the population high-quality
food and energy resources, but also has a significant impact on the Lithuanian countryside, as it is home
to one-third of the country's population. Through strengthening the agricultural production base and
capacity of infrastructure development, the rural population life is gradually improving. The country's
agricultural development has previously been driven by the European Union (EU) and national budget
support. In 2011, Lithuania's budget funds for agriculture and direct investment support, intervention,
and other market regulatory measures, peaked at 2.59 billion LTL.
In recent years the Lithuanian agriculture sector has undergone rapid structural changes. The
increase in average farm size and decreasing number of farms has been one of the main trends.
Compared from 2007 to 2011, the average farm size has increased from 11.0 to 13.8 ha. Contingent
workers in the agriculture sector, on the basis of the agricultural census and the structure data, fell from
173.6 to 143.4 thousand. Consequently, there have been changes in the structure of agricultural land decline of grasslands and increasing arable land. Although Lithuania is traditionally a land of livestock
farming, it provides excellent natural conditions and export markets for the further development of this
branch. Nonetheless the number of animals has recently rapidly declined. Decreasing labor demand in
agriculture and emigration of young people has unfortunately not bypassed the countryside. In 2011,
58% farmers and contributing family workers were on average older than 50 years of age.
Unfortunately several negative trends are also apparent - emptying villages, abandoned
farmland and a rapidly declining employment in low-productivity farmland areas. These recent
developments highlight the need to re-evaluate agricultural problems, issues and achievements, in
order to look for new and alternative competitive advantages in the development sector.
2
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
1. Common characteristics as well as common opportunities and
threats for the production of local and regional foods
1.1.
Average size (in hectares and animal heads) of the producer of primary
local/regional food (LRF) in Lithuania
Growing up in the average farm size and decreasing number of farms has been one of the main
trends. Compared to 2007, in 2011 the average farm size increased from 11.0 to 13.8 ha, and contingent
workers in the agriculture sector, on the basis of the agricultural census and the structure data, fell from
173.6 to 143.4 thousand.
Structure of farms by declared agricultural area in 2010
Country
Number of farms, thousands/ structure, perc.
[0-2] ha
[2-5] ha
[5-10]
[10-50]
[50-100]
ha
ha
ha
Lithuania Number, 32,60
84,80
39,90
34,00
4,80
thou.
perc.
16,3
42,4
20,0
17,00
2,4
Structure of farms by declared agricultural area in 2011
Country
Number of farms, thousands/ structure, perc.
<5
[5,1[10,1[20,1- [50,1[100,1ha
10] ha 20] ha 50] ha 100] ha 500] ha
Lithuania Number, 88,8 36,3
20,6
12,2
5,1
3,8
thou.
perc.
53,1 21,7
12,3
7,3
3,0
2,3
100+ ha
3,80
Total no
of farms
199,90
1,9
100
>500
ha
0,4
0,3
All
Average
farms
167,3
16,3
100
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural register (holding register), simplified direct payments system information data.
Number of agricultural entities in 2007-2011
Agricultural entities
Registered farmer farms, thou.
Agricultural companies and enterprises
Households, thou.
2007
101,0
586
125,3
2008
108,0
602
108,7
2009
107,0
632
103,2
2010
108,7
662
99,2
2011
111,1
734
94,0
3
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
1.2.
Data of types and amounts of LRF produced in Lithuania in 2011
In the year 2011 the Lithuanian agricultural and food sector has been showing favorable
trends. Thanks to good weather conditions, production volumes have increased in many agricultural
areas, thus increasing the purchase prices further. In recent years, decreased consumption in domestic
and foreign markets have witnessed a significant recovery and upswing. As a result, the agriculture and
related services sectors have experienced a gross value added increase, at constant rate of 1.3% (based
on preliminary data, previously 2648.7 million LTL).
“Lietuvos žemės ūkis,” 2012
4
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
1.2.1. Livestock farming
The livestock sector in Lithuania is an important agricultural element which supplys domestic
consumers with various livestock products. Livestock products account for roughly half of the
agricultural output. Of these, almost half is composed of milk production, and otherwise livestock and
poultry meat. Only a small percentage lies in egg, wool, honey, beeswax and other livestock production.
Year on year the number of cattle has gradually declined, but the supply of these products remains
relatively high. During the analyzed period (2007-2011), the highest reduction was detected in the
number of cows. However due to higher yield rates, milk was produced double the rate necessary to
supply the domestic market. While a third of calves are exported, beef production increased almost
three-fold in comparison to the country's population consumption rate. The rapidly expanding poultry
farming sector, e.g. poultry has become the cheapest and best selling variety of meat. Most of the
country's population consumes pork, but in Lithuania only one third of the total demand is grown up.
Due to the lack of interest and promotion of strict environmental requirements, pig loses decades held
positions.
According to Department of Statistics, during the 2011 period, farm production of cattle and
pigs were considered to be only one-third of the previous 1990 levels. In 2011 compared to 1990,
farmers and family farms increased numbers of cattle by 14 %,while cow number have decreased by 3
%, pigs by 32%, and the number of sheep and goats have increased by 45%.
Productions of livestock 2009-2011,(thou. t).
2009
Livestock, slaughtered (l.w.)
272,0
Milk production
1 791,0
Egg production, mill, pieces
853,4
2010
301,2
1 736,5
829,6
Number of livestock and poultry in 2007-2011, (thou. t).
Kind of animal
2007
2008
2009
2010
Cattle
787,9
770,9
759,4
758,0
-of which dairy cows
404,5
394,7
374,6
359,8
Pigs
923,2
897,1
928,2
929,4
Poultry
9874,8
9107,5 9308,7 9466,3
Sheep
43,3
47,5
52,5
58,5
2011
309,8
1 786,4
773,7
2011*
752,4
349,5
790,3
8921,2
60,4
* Preliminary data of the Statistics Lithuania
Lietuvos žemės ūkis, 2010. Statistikos departamentas, 2011. ISSN 2029-2658
According to Department of Statistics, by the end of 2011 the number of cattle in Lithuania
increased to 752.4 thou. Cattle. While 46 percent of them included dairy cows, especially - Lithuanian
Black and White (66 %) and Lithuanian Brown (19 %). Butchery and crossbred cattle accounted for 14
percent.
The domestic market in 2011 realized 277.7 thousand tones of meat and meat products for an
equivalent of 1.9 billion LTL. Compared to the pre-crisis period in 2008, the market decreased by
5
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
approximately 15 percent and by value - 28 percent. There have been clear changes in the structure of
population consumption. Raw meat and poultry consumption has not diminished, but the consumption
of meat products was considerably lower at 50 %.
1.2.2. Milk
The dairy farm value of Lithuanian agriculture remains nonetheless high. In 2007 milk
accounted for 25.7 percent, and in 2010 up to 24.7 percent of total agricultural production. It is the
largest agricultural segment of the country economy. Nonetheless, the combination of sudden price
fluctuations and unequal conditions in the sale of milk, means that a significant number of small
producers are paid less than the purchase price, spawning a reduction in the number of small milk
producers. This is why the number of 10 – 19 cows having farms decreased, although the overall
number of milk producers increased in the prior years. While the increasing productivity of dairy cows
milk production did not fall as significantly as the decrease in number, but the purchased by Lithuanian
dairy processors amounts of milk is not sufficient. Hence the noticeable increase in the import of raw
milk.
Almost all the milk is gathered from dairy cows. Goats' milk in 2010 covered just 0.2 % of all
produced milk and since 2007 has been steadily declining by relative physical weight. The majority of
milk is produced by farmers and family farms, but is being gradually increased by agricultural companies
and businesses through relative weight methods. In 2007 they produced 13.7 percent of milk and in
2010 - 16.2 percent.
Milk production and purchase in 2007-2011, (thou. t)
Indicators
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Milk
1936.6 1883.8 1791.0 1736.5 1754.0
production
Milk purchase
- natural
1348.5 1375.6 1274.2 1278.3 1317.1*
fatness
-basic
1628.2 1660.8 1534.3 1540.4 1587.2
fatness**
2011 compared to 2007, %
91
98
97
*4.14 % milk fat, 3.27 % protein
** 3.4 % milk fat, 3.0 % protein
Lietuvos ekonominė ir socialinė raida, 2011.Statistikos departamentas, 2012.
ISSN 1392–2874
Lietuvos žemės ūkis, 2010.Statistikos departamentas, 2011. ISSN 2029-3658
1.2.3. Production of dairy products
6
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
The Lithuanian dairy sector is dominated by three dairy processing company groups: SC
„Rokiskio cheese“, SC „Dairy stars“ and SC „Zemaitijos milk“. During the year of 2011, this group of
companies received approximately 63 percent of all dairy processing profit, 7 percent points lower than
in 2010. In recent years another dairy processing group „Vilkyskiu dairy“. incresed its activities. In 2011,
as well as in 2010, the company received a total of 10 percent dairy processing profit. Other dairy
companies and their subgroups are significantly smaller.
Lithuanians main dairy industry specialization includes cheese production. In 2011 compared
to 2007, the amount of cheese production has increased by (23 percent). Production of fresh cheese,
dry milk and whey products further increased by 10 percent.
Production of main dairy products in 2011, (thou. t)
Products
2011
2011, compared to 2007, %
Drinking milk
102.6
105
Sour milk, kefir
33.9
96
Yoghurt
14.6
84
Sour cream & mixes
28.3
106
Curd
26.5
123
Butter and other milk fats
8.7
71
Fresh cheese
24.8
110
Unprocessed cheese
46.8
89
Dried milk and whey products
39.2
110
Ice cream, mill. l
18.1
74
Canned dairy products
21.5
98
Gaminių gamyba,2007-2011. Statistikos departamentas. ISSN 1648–5777;
1.2.4. Crop production
Cereals
In Lithuania conditions for cereal plant growing are favorable. It is dominated by medium
fertility soils – originally from natural fertility soils similar to those of other countries in the surrounding
region (Poland, Denmark, southern Scandinavia and other). Although the duration of the growing
season, average temperature and country conditions are worse. This relative superiority of Lithuania is
similarly compared to neighboring northern countries. Grain shortage in the world and EU cereal
markets promoted the country's farmers to grow more grain crops, although the amount of production
in Lithuania was growing more slowly than for other crops. In 2011 grain crops sowed in at 54.1 percent
of total crop area (2010 - 54.5, 2009 - 59.2, 2008 - 60.6, 2007 - 60.4 percent). Compared to 2010, in the
year 2011 the cereal production capacity increased by 2.8 percent and during the 2007 to 2011 period
grew by 7.4 percent in the country. Cereal area production increased by 7.2 percent during the period of
2007-2011 and legumes - by 13.5 percent. The largest areas of cereal crops in 2011 were applied to
7
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
wheat production - 51.7 percent, barley - 23.6, triticale - 9.0 oats - 5.9, rye - 4.0, buckwheat - 2.6
percent.
Sugar Beet
Lithuania - one of the 19 EU-countries, produced sugar beets in 2011. During this period
Lithuanian based harvested sugar beets made up a minor 0.7 percent of all EU sugar beets harvests.
Most sugar beet is grown in Central Lithuania, where there are suitable soil conditions. Lithuania’s sugar
beet acreage increased from 16.9 per thousand ha in 2007 to 17.7 per thousand ha in 2011. While there
were two companies to whom the two sugar factories belonged: SC “Nordic Sugar Kedainiai” and SC
"Arvi sugar”, both based in Lithuania.
Potatoes
The Lithuanian potato crop, relative to other crops decreased during 2007-2011 Whereby in
2007 levels amounted to 3 percent and in 2011 only 1.8 percent of all annual crops. Country growers
marginally expanded potato production areas in 2011. Although the amount of potatoes was still 3.3
percent more than in 2010, it was overall down by 28.4 percent in comparison to 2007. In Lithuania
average consumption per capita stood at approximately 92 kg potatoes in 2011, 3 % more than the
previous year, but 4 % less than in 2009, when potato consumption was at its peak. Lithuanians
consume 26 % more potatoes than the EU average.
Vegetables
In recent years the production area of vegetable crops in Lithuania stood at 14 thou. acres and
accounted to approximately 0.7 percent of all agricultural crops. The year 2011 witnessed an increase
of (1.4 %) in vegetable plantation in comparison to 2010 levels. 98.6 % of field vegetables were
cultivated by farmers and only 1.4 % by agricultural companies. Root vegetables (carrots, onions, beets
and other) accounted for 52.3 %, cabbage - 23.2 % (of which 85.9 % white cabbage) of the total crop
amount.
In comparison to 2010, total production in 2011 for the following vegetables increased
significantly: 49.3 % (757.1 tons) of sauerkraut, dried onion - 66.0 % (771.2 tons) and 14.3 % in tomato
ketchup (13.6 tons). The total amount of frozen vegetables and tomato juice produced in the past five
years amounted to255.7 tons. Products based on vegetable production remained the focus within the
domestic market.
Crop production, (thou. t)
Grain crops
Rape
Sugar beet
Potatoes
2009 m.
3 892,3
415,8
682,0
662,5
2010 m.
2 867,2
416,7
706,7
476,9
2011 m.
30303,9
484,3
877,8
587,7
8
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
Field vegetables
293,3
164,0
287,6
Department of statistics
Fruit and berries
The gardening and berry sector is very much affected by varying weather conditions. Over the
past few years, this has led to a decrease in the level of yields. However, 2011 was a much more
favorable year to the industry, in terms of crop cultivation. Therefore collected fruit and berry harvest in
2011 stood at 60.3 thousand t, 16.8 % higher than in 2007 and even 37.0 % more than in 2010. Most of
the 2011 fruit harvests were accounted by apples, making a total of more than 81 %. Other fruit and
berry harvest (pears, strawberries, raspberries, black currants, and other) accounted for an average of 3
% of the sector's harvest.
Due to small gardening, berry farms and unfavorable climatic conditions, Lithuania did not
manage to grow an adequate amount of fruits and berries. Lithuanian production covers only a third or
a quarter of fruit demand. In Lithuania fruit consumption rates are one of the lowest within the EU
region. According to health organizations Lithuanians fruit consumption does not meet recommended
rates, which stand at about 91 kg of fruit per year per adult. According to Eurostat, the majority of the
Lithuanian citizen’s fruit diet consists of citrus fruit – making up approximately 40 % of annual intake of
fruits. Grapes and apples accounted for one-tenth per capita of all annual consumption of fruits and
berries.
1.2.5. Fishery
Lithuanian weather conditions are favorable in terms of the development of fisheries. The
country is rich in suitable water reservoirs. The Baltic Sea, with an ice-free Klaipeda port and direct
access points with the Atlantic Ocean and the further waters, creates good conditions for fishing.
Marine fisheries
In 2011, Lithuania's Baltic Sea fleet caught 16.0 thousand tons of fish, of which about 98% - in
the Baltic Sea and on the coast a minor 0.3 thousand tons (2 %).
Fish catches* in the Baltic Sea in 2011, tons
Year
Cod
Baltic herring Sprat
2011
3057
2655
9730
Flounder
456
Other
92
Total
15990
*Live weight
Lietuvos statistikos metraštis,2011.Statistikos departamentas, 2011. ISSN 2029-3631
Inland fisheries
In 2011, 4764 tons of fish was caught in inland water - 9.3% less than in 2007. More than half
(69.0%) of all inland fish were grown in aquaculture ponds. In 2011 natural inland water catches
precipitated to 1,476 tons of fish, most from the Curonian Lagoon (77.1%), rivers (9.5%) and Kaunas
9
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
Lagoon (4.7%). A relatively small number of fish are caught in the lakes (2011 - 67.8 tons). Other water
sources, especially lakes are more important for recreational fishing.
Commercial fishing
20 aquaculture companies and about 100 farmers are breeding fish in artificial ponds.
Aquaculture ponds design capacity reflects a sales volume of 5.0 thousand fish per year. Lithuanian
pond farming is dominated by small companies. About 95% of production consists of carp. However,
species of fish grown by aquaculture companies is gradually expanding. Trout, sturgeon, catfish, pike,
bream, trench, herbivorous fish, salmon, sea trout and other species are being constantly cultivated.
Most of the breeded fish are sold in the domestic market.
1.3.
Distribution of food processing companies of small-size, mid-size and
large-size in Lithuania (2011)
In 2011, Lithuania had 844 food and beverage manufacturing companies. 24.3% of all
businesses were sole proprietorship. During 2007-2011 the total number of enterprises decreased by
8.8%, and sole proprietorship - more than 41.8%.
Entities of the food industry in 2011
Production
Food products and beverages
Grain milling products and starch
Meat and meat products
Milk and dairy products
Preservation and processing of fish and fish products
Preparation, processing and conservation of fruit,
berries and vegetables
Number of
enterprises
844
28
159
29
44
32
Number of
employees
41000
1245
8726
5526
4181
934
Sales in domestic
market, LTL mill
7341,5
298,2
1306,4
1903,2
256,1
100,1
Department of statistics
Largest food and beverage industry companies in Lithuania
No
Company
Main activity
1
AB “Kauno grūdai”
Combined feed and flour
2
AB “Pieno žvaigždės”
Manufacture of dairy products
3
AB “Rokiškio sūris”
Dairies and cheese making
4
AB “Krekenavos agrofirma”
Meat and meat products
5
AB grupė “Žemaitijos pienas”
Cheese and other dairy products
10
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
6
UAB “Švyturys - Utenos alus”
Beer production
7
UAB “Mars Lietuva”
Food production, food trade
8
AB “Kraft Foods Lietuva”
Confectionery manufacturing, trade
9
UAB grupė “Biovela”
Slaughtering, preparation
UAB “Marijampolės pieno konservai”
Manufacture of dairy products
10
Verslo žinios,2012
The number of Lithuania’s small food processing companies and farmers' workshops increased
recently. The spread of farmers' markets, shopping centers, setting up offices, where traditional
products are sold to small producers, simplified an opportunity to enter the market.
Lithuanian markets are the most common direct marketing tool, but recently mobile and
weekend farmers' markets have become more popular, in which users can directly buy food grown by
the farmers. Lithuania has a total of more than 100 markets. Otherwise, there are 19 markets in Vilnius,
Kaunas - 6, Panevezys - 3, and in the Kedainiai - 1 Farmers' Markets.
1.4.
Main distribution channels of LRF
Local food producers can distribute their production locally in several ways:





Sell production in the market
Supply production to supermarkets
Sell production directly to customers, people, families
Supply production directly to restaurants/cafes
Sell production to food processing companies
There are potential opportunities for rural communities to participate in the food supply chain
of Lithuania, such as:
•
•
•
using a variety of market channels and tactics, such as marketing directly from the farm shops,
farmers' markets through the Internet and by using developed supply networks;
a diverse mix of new commercial opportunities;
selection of shorter transportation distances to the point of sale.
Integrated parties of the local food supply chain are often actively involved, not only in one,
but several chains. Farmers are proud of, and show an interest in eco-friendly products which they
themselves are often involved in, through the processing and marketing of their grown organic produce.
This usually means that farmers can inform customers about the products they buy, as well as offering a
familiarization of how the food they buy was produced and the benefits of sustainable food production.
11
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
This is how awareness among consumers is increasind and helps during the selection process in which
food and drink is consumed.
Melnikiene,R. Lietuvos žemės ir maisto ūkis,2013)
1.5.
Types of common labels and/or marketing systems (indicating that the
food is locally produced)
The main form of local food labeling is conducted through writing on the label that the certain
product is locally produced, indicating the region where the given food was produced and the name of
the land owner (sometimes with contact details). Typically there are given logos such as “has been
produced (made) in Lithuania”. Occasionally they are supplied with the exact geographical location
indicated on the product packaging. Ecological products are labeled with a certified in EU logo (often
named “Euro-leaf”).
The three main supermarket chains (Maxima, Iki, Rimi) offer in their supermarkets separate
food sections dedicated to organic and local food products, supplied by farmers and family farms.
Furthermore they are distributed products with labels, for example „MAXIMA ekologica“. which
indicates that the selected assortments including foods are organic and can certify the origin with
relevant certificates. More than half of such organic products are sourced from certified local producers
and the rest is imported.
12
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
There are also existing trademarks embodied by tradition and history which can be found in
large markets and on local producer’s production labels. According to the national register, there are 5
names registered with the word “traditional”, 14 – “antecedents”, “traditions of antecedents”, 17 –
“bočių” (in Lithuanian meaning grandfather, ancestor), 10 – “Grandmother’s”, “Granny”.
1.6.
Trends (in last 5 years) in LRF production in Lithuania
Changes in agricultural and food products trade in country market
The largest proportion of food and beverage production company’s sales in the year 2011, as
in previous years, was generated from milk, meat and various other products and beverages. Compared
to the previous years, there has been a witnessed 4% increase in sales of dairy products, and 1% point
increase for ready-made feed sales, 3% points drop in drinks and a 1% point decrease in meat products,
fish and fishery products, grain mill products and other food products sales. The Department of Statistics
has further stated that in the year 2011, harvested grain supply for Lithuania was 14% higher than in
2010. Almost the same amount in 2010 consisted of the slaughter of animals and production of milk.
The amount of purchased agricultural production was nearly the same as in previous years. Otherwise
cereal and potatos were purchased in less amounts as farmers delayed sales and waited for more
favourable prices. In 2011, an average Lithuanian citizen consumed a total 72kg of meat and different
meat products per year. Comparing to the year 2010 – a 2kg increase in meat consumption levels. On
average in most EU countries meat and meat products are consumed in 25% more each year. Cereal
consumption is currently decreasing in Lithuania. During the period of 2007-2011 the yearly domestic
consumption decreased by 10.2 % year on year. The average citizen in 2011 compared to 2007,
consumed 7.4% less cereals. the total population consumption fund during this period decreased by
12.4%. According to Department of Statistics, in 2011 production of sugar witnessed an (prepared or
canned fruits and vegetables, flour, fruit and vegetable juices, confectionery and cheese). While other
produce such as fresh cheese, canned milk, natural mineral waters and aerated waters production saw a
production decrease.
13
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
2. Local cuisines in Lithuania, regional analysis
2.1. Restaurants serving LRF Lithuania (2011)
At the beginning of 2012, the network of Lithuanian Responsible Restaurants and Suppliers
was created. LITHUANIAN RESPONSIBLE RESTAURANT AND SUPPLIERS (LRRS) is an open supply network
of Lithuanian restaurants. LRRS members undertake voluntary commitments related to the sustainable
use of raw materials in the restaurant business These include conditions such as quality, environmental
policy, communication and cooperation with the public. Within the network owned restaurants,
customers can get all the information regarding the restaurant andcafés used products, their
ingredients, allergens, GMO use, origin and method of preparation. Furthermore they can find
information regarding all environmental policies and actions concerning this issue.
 The LRRS network was developed and promoted so that the food, accommodation and
entertainment part of the business would be responsible for, consumer, visitor, customer,
environment and society issues.
 Exlusive network business features include transparency through clients who can regularly
be informed regarding the food they eat and how institutions contribute to the protection
of the environment and natural resources.
 The number of network members is clearly on the increase. Until now there have been 18
members of restaurants/cafes in Vilnius, 3 – in Kaunas, 2 in Klaipeda, 2 in Siauliai, 1 in
Panevezys and 1 in Druskininkai.
One of the crucial restaurant responsible business principles include the notion that not less
than 20% of products, from which the food is cooked, must be locally sourced. Meaning that it must be
produced in Lithuania and not have an organic product made up of less than 10%. The leaders of main
institutions such as the Responsible Restaurants network, highlight the lack of Lithuanian local raw
materials, which entails the potential production of high-quality food. Farmers hesitate to produce more
local food as they fear that it will not be effectively marketed. The mentioned network serves the
purpose in bringing together farmers, so that they can supply vegetables, dairy and meat products in
large quantities and in regular intervals.
2.2.
Benefit of serving LRF in Lithuanian restaurants
14
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
A recent study indicated that the typical Lithuanian restaurant visitor wants to eat fresh,
exquisite kitchen produced food, produced only from local products. Although joined LRRS network
caterers are not planned to receive any material benefits from this project, the intangable benefit
includes a gradually changing customer attitudes and respect towards the supply of healthy food in
restaurants. Furthermore the potential exists to achieve a higher profit margin through charging food at
a higher price. For such initiatives most important aim is increasing awareness - and activity rather than
embeding formality and control. Thus the Responsible Restaurant business initiative will remain a nongovernmental organization.
2.3.
Type of meals made of LRF which are served in Lithuania
Despite the fact that there are a large variety of meals made by the LRF and served in
Lithuania, there are various recommended traditional food products, which consist of a large range of
local food:



Bread
o Black rye bread
o Scalded rye bread
Meat products
o Traditional Lithuanian sausage
o Dried sausage
o Smoked sausage
o Smoked bacon
o Smoked ham
Milk/dairy products
o Sour cream butter
o Cottage cheese
o Sweet curd cheese
o Grilled cheese
o Dried cheese
o Curdled milk
2.4.



o Butter
Fish products
o Smoked eel
o Dried fish
Drinks
o Kvass
o Sula
Pastries
o Gingerbread mushrooms
o Cakes with bacon
o Christmas Eve cookies
o Donuts
o Doughnuts
o Branch
o Apple cheese
Opportunities and challenges in serving LRF at Lithuanian restaurants?
Requirements for food production on farms:

Farmers can collect cabbage, cucumbers, juice and sell them or make them available to the
public catering companies. According to the SFVS Director, 2009 March 10. Order No. B1-117
Food Processing requirements for non-animal food products
15
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY

Farm-produced milk and dairy products farmers may supply directly to the consumers, shops,
marketplaces and catering companies, in accordance with the SFVS Director 2008. April 24.
Order No. B1-251

Under the requirements of the local market farmers can supply directly to the consumers,
shops, marketplaces in amounts of up to 50 kg caught fish, up to 100 kg (one-time catch) smelt.

Farmers holding up to 50 hens can sell chicken eggs on the marketsplace (such eggs are not
required to be labeled.) During the sales process, the eggs have to be marked with the farms
name and address).

Direct supply to consumers, shops, marketplaces, whereby catering farmers can supply poultry,
lagomorphs and meat produced, functions in accordance with the Bird and lagomorphs fresh
meat supply in small batches for the local market (Official Gazette, 2008, Nr. 153-5667).

Farmers can deliver fresh fruit and vegetables to catering companies, in accordance with
"imported, exported and supplied to domestic fresh fruit and vegetables markets in conformity
with marketing standards of the rules" (Official Gazette, 2011, Nr. 143-6732).
The crucial challenge in offering LRF to farmers, family farms and local food producers is to ensure
an adequate amount of supplies to the given network of restaurants.
16
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
3. Local food producers’ perceptions of threats and opportunities in
local food production
In order to better clarify local food producers’ perceptions of threats and opportunities in local
food production, 3 key groups of producers have been identified: 1st group consisting of one of the
largest agricultural companies, 2nd the local food producers who sell their production in the markets and
the 3rd group which is made up of producers, who supply local food products directly to consumers. The
questions were presented to 6 responders: 2 producers from each group.
Main responses from large agricultural companies (68-82 employees, one representing livestock,
the other – crop farming):
- Not satisfied with the Ministry of Agricultures approach in supportinglarge-scale farmers.
- There is a need to review legislative framework, through invites such as (Regfood projects) in order to facilitate
-
broader discussions.
"It should be estimated how many people are working with us and how much each of them own in terms of acres and
the output of the amount of taxes we pay to the state”.
The new CAP project also includes financial incentives for large farmers to reduce direct payments for arable crops
Investment in animal husbandry may restrict and suspend EU funds.
Technological production processes are complicated and require high precision and responsibility.
It is necessary to recieve initial financial support, even if there is additional support from EU funds in establishing a
company..
Main responses from local food producers, who sell their produce in the marketplace:
-
There is enough profit gained from local food production to support one family.
Taxes for selling local produce are too high - the government and the market place owners both have to reduce taxes
for small family farmers.
Cash register introduction to the marketplace further complicate work, in many instances through reduced profit.
In the marketplace the majority of production is sourced from small family farms.It is very difficult to offer their
produce to supermarkets because farms are unable to ensure a steady and adequate flow and supply of products.
The local food they produce embodies quality through natural and healthy growing Lithuania, thus satisfying the
needs of the local inhabitants.
Main responses from local food producers, who sell the production directly to consumers:
-
The profit is not fixed as the producers provide the consumers food directly. The produce is supplied directly to
consumers’ homes and working places.
The production consists of small amounts, thus producers are unable to sell effectively in the marketplace.
Small producers face various barriers in expanding their business.
Family farms are relatively small, meaning that they are unoptimistic that the following years will bring sufficient
amounts of profit.
17
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
-
The provided food is traditional, natural and much healthier for adults and children especially. All the ingredients
used in production is sourced and made in Lithuania – the owners consume this food by themselves, so they can
assure, that the quality of food is of high quality.
3.2. Conclusions of the strategic analysis of the agriculture of Lithuania: agricultural
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis.
1. There is an existing technical potential in terms of farm infrastructure and large crop farms
modernisation. As production capacity provides increased added value and export possibilities,
whilefarm economics complies with risk management principles.
2. The viability of small and medium-sized farms depends on the production originality and the
ability to process agricultural production on farms through directly passing it on to consumers
without intermediaries in areas where the farms are located. However, the financial resources
of farms adequaite for modernization or processing of agricultural production, having a pure
value-added increase is a insufficient aim.
3. Support from EU funds through financing is disadvantageous to the livestock farming sector both unfavorable to the newly emerging livestock farms and farmers who want to expand there
livestock. The decrease in the number of animals indicates a decline in farmers' interest in the
development of livestock farming. Livestock business, compared to the crop production is less
attractive because it needs more labor resources. Labor process is uninterrupted, there is no
time not only to engage in other activities, but also for recreation. Livestock farms create
significantly less income per 1 AWU (SD) than crop production. Environmental requirements are
much more stringent than that of the crop sector.
4. Cooperative development is not merely sufficient. Currently, cooperatives cover only a small
part of a small farm.
5. The food supply chain from farm to fork food industry and retail chains are very complex, so
farmers and consumers have little ability and authority to influence it directly. To meet the
needs of consumers and enhance the viability of small farms, the development of direct sales is
necessary.
Strengths
1. Large farms have achieved a significant intensification of production and generate income that
enables us to continue the modernisation of production.
2. Large farms and cooperatives have created opportunities to export many of there products as
an alternative to the current production on the food industry.
3. Food processing industries are upgraded to meet EU requirements and specifications.
4. Lithuanian agriculture and food producers maintain a strong position in the domestic market.
18
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
5. Relatively, high milk, dairy products and grain export volumes. While meat exports are
increasing as well.
Weaknesses
1. Low labor productivity and intensiveness of agriculture.
2. Small and medium-sized farms are unable to compete with large farms on land acquisition and
therefore are not in a position to expand.
3. Small and medium-sized farms lack financial resources for investment in the modernization of
farms and new technologies.
4. Small and medium-sized farms have few assets and are therefore not in a position to acquire
funds for investment through co-financing support.
5. Sluggish agricultural activity of subjects in the economic diversification process.
6. Lack of cooperative development.
7. Large concentrations of farms in most of the food and retail industry.
8. Underdeveloped direct selling methods for agricultural and food product.
Threats
1. EU direct support decoupled from production and crop production has become economically
more viable than livestock farming.
2. The emigration of young people from rural areas will consequently decrease the working-age
population. Hence, agricultural producers will feel the effect of a shortage of labor and gradual
rising costs of labor.
3. Increasing environmental laws and regulations could have a negative impact on farmers'
profitability.
Facilities
1. With increasing incomes and changing consumer trends in the field of nutrition, Lithuanias
preference for organic, high-quality and locally sourced products - means that it is more than
likely that that the consumption of these given products will increase.
2. Advanced technology and innovation in agriculture will enable efficient farming and effective
environmental problem solving.
3. Information technology applied to agricultural production methods facilitates more efficient
production and sales processes, creating further opportunities for direct sales strategies.
19
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
4. Local consumers’ perceptions of benefits of local food
The survey was carried out using a web tool on the website www.manoapklausa.lt, where the
questionnaire was placed.
Descriptive statistics of respondents: total number of respondents 103, male 13, female 90, mean
age 33.2 years.
1.
Are you familiar with the concept of local food?
If yes: Where do you buy it (e.g., farmer’s shop, street market, restaurant, grocery
store, supermarket, etc.)?
The answers to the first question „Are you familiar with the concept of local food” distributed:
yes - 47 (46.1%), no - 20 (19.6%), I have heard something, but I have insufficient information - 35
(34.3%).
Respondents who replied with „Yes“ chose various answers: in the local farmer’s shop – 51
(24.4%), directly from farmers – 46 (22%), on the street market – 20 (9.6%), grocery store – 23
(11%), supermarket – 57 (27.3%), other (mostly local market) – 12 (5.7%).
2. What do you associate with local food? (e.g., radius of 50 km, short distance, etc.)
Produced in the area and from the locally cropped products where person lives, at about 50 –
200 km radius.
3. What are the characteristics of local food?
There are a wide variety of answers, but they can by summarized: safe, healthy, fresh,
traditional, clean, ecological, natural, qualitative, tasty
4. What do you think about the quality of local food? (e.g., freshness, tastiness, traditional
production, etc.)
20
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
Fresh
83
Tasty
65
Healthier
82
Quality preserved for many years
16
Have more negatyve aspects (contaminated, unclear origin) 5
Other
5
Total number of answers
256
103 respondents, most common answer is "Fresh".
5. How important is it to you to buy local food?
Very important
53
Important
43
Not important
6
32.4%
25.4%
32%
6.3%
2%
2%
52%
42.2%
5.9%
6. Has your attitude to local food changed over the last 5 years?
Has changed – 61 (59.2%), and has not changed – 42 (40.8%)
7. Are you willing to pay more for a local food product as compared to with conventional food?
Yes - 56 (54.9%), no – 25 (24.5%), does not provide a great importance – 21 (20.6%)
8. How much of your total budget goes towards buying local food?
There are a wide variety of answers, ranging from 12 to 50 percent of total budget.
9. How much of your food budget goes to buying local food?
There were a wide variety of answers, ranging from 10 to 90 percent of food budget.
10. How much trust do you have in food which claims to be local?
Yes, I trust
62
60.2%
No, I do not trust
16
15.5%
Have no opinion
25
24.3%
11. Should there be special "labels" facilitating the identification of local food?
There was clear attitude identified in answers:
Yes
89
No
8
No opinion 5
87.3%
7.8%
4.9%
21
KLAIPĖDA
UNIVERSITY
References
1.
Lietuvos Respublikos žemės ūkio ministerjia. Available at: < http://www.zum.lt/>
2.
Lietuvos žemės ūkis, 2012.
3.
Lithuanian Department of Statistics. Available at: < http://www.stat.gov.lt/>
4.
Melnikienė, R., 2011. Lietuvos žemės ir maisto ūkis. Available at:
<http://www.laei.lt/?mt=leidiniai&straipsnis=479&metai=2012 >
5.
Melninkienė, R., 2013. Dėl Lietuvos nacionalinės žemės ūkio strategijos po 2013 metų įgyvendinant
žaliosios knygos ,,Lietuvos kaimo ateitis” prioritetus.
6.
Mikelionytė, D., Lukošiutė, I., Petrauskaitė, L., 2010. Tiesioginių žemės ūkio ir maisto produktų
pardavimų skatinimas, atsižvelgiant į vartotojų prioritetus, p.22.
7.
Oficialiosios statistikos portalas. Available at: < http://osp.stat.gov.lt/rodikliai53 >
8.
Plenarin, O.J.I., Komisija, E., (2011) Regionų komitetas, p.1-6.
9.
Verslo žinios, 2012. Didžiausios maisto ir gėrimų pramonės bendrovės. Available at:<
http://laikrastis.vz.lt/index.php?act=mprasa&sub=article&id=51564 >
22