Supported byOwner's Engineer
Clarion Energy banner

Challenges and solutions in Serbian animal husbandry

Supported byspot_img

State subsidies, while substantial, are not a panacea for revitalizing animal husbandry, asserts Dragan Glamočić, a professor at the Faculty of Agriculture in Novi Sad, in an interview with RTS. He suggests that the key to recovery lies in increased investment following the European Union model. Glamočić criticizes the introduction of meat import quotas, labeling it a protectionist measure that fuels smuggling. He advises small-scale producers to unite to prevent dairies from monopolizing profits.

Glamočić highlights the disparity in subsidies compared to the Netherlands, where despite lower subsidies per capita and hectare, export results are 30 times better than in Serbia. He points out that while the budget for agriculture has increased, the allocation for investments has decreased, resulting in a decline in livestock production. Glamočić emphasizes the need for increased investment, citing the European Union’s strategy of allocating 25% of funds to investment, with plans to increase it to 35%.

Regarding meat import quotas, Glamočić criticizes the measure, stating that it leads to absurd situations where imported meat is cheaper in neighboring countries, fueling smuggling activities. He stresses the importance of addressing fragmented production and advocating for farmers’ rights in negotiations with dairies and trade chains.

Supported by

Glamočić also highlights the discrepancy in subsidies between crop and animal production, noting that subsidies for crop production are significantly higher, despite the year-round commitment required for animal husbandry. He calls for a more balanced approach to subsidies to incentivize growth in the livestock sector.

Supported by


Supported byClarion Energy
Serbia Energy News
error: Content is protected !!