Food Security in Focus: Europe


Published on

Food security in focus: Europe 2014 is an Economist
Intelligence Unit (EIU) report commissioned by
DuPont. The report discusses the major findings in
the 2014 Global Food Security Index (GFSI)) for the
26 countries of Europe included in the index.

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Food Security in Focus: Europe

  1. 1. Sponsoredby A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit Food securityinfocus: Europe 2014
  2. 2. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20141 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 is an Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) report commissioned by DuPont. The report discusses the major findings in the 2014 Global Food Security Index (GFSI)) for the 26 countries of Europe included in the index. About the GFSI The GFSI considers the core issues of affordability, availability, and quality & safety across a set of 109 countries. The index is a dynamic quantitative and qualitative benchmarking model, constructed from 28 unique indicators, that measures the drivers of food security across both developed and developing countries. Food security is defined as the state in which people at all times have physical, social and economic access to sufficient and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs for a healthy and active life, based on the definition established at the 1996 World Food Summit. The overall goal of the study is to assess the vulnerability of food systems to security and insecurity by looking at drivers of the Affordability, Availability, and Quality & Safety of food. The 2014 GFSI is the third annual index in this series. Acknowledgements Lucy Hurst, associate director of custom research for the Americas, was the project director. Joshua Grundleger, analyst, was the project manager. Katherine Stewart, research associate, was the editor of the Food security in focus series. Martin Vieiro, analyst, provided research and analytical support. Leo Abruzzese, global forecasting director and global director of public policy, served as senior adviser. William Shallcross designed and constructed the benchmarking model, and Mike Kenny was responsible for layout and design. Dana Vorisek provided regional expertise. PrefaceContents A regional analysis of food security 2 Regional results and comparisons 3 Food security in Europe 6 The countries of Europe 9 Appendix 11
  3. 3. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20142 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 The Food security in focus regional reports identify both similarities and differences between countries in each region and highlight regional areas of strength and weakness, providing regional analysis and context to the results in the 2014 GFSI. Food security is a complex and nuanced issue, which can be analysed through many viewpoints and from many geographical perspectives— national, regional and global. To facilitate greater insight into the primary elements of global food security, and to develop a common standard against which all countries and regions can be measured, The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) created the Global Food Security Index (GFSI). The index is a tool to be used by a wide range of organisations and individuals working to address food security and the smooth functioning of food systems at a variety of levels. Some of the major elements of food security and, in particular, the deficiencies that may lead to greater food insecurity, differ across the globe. The regional reports seek to facilitate a deeper analysis of food security through a unique lens. Specifically, these reports seek to: l Examine regional challenges, strengths and issues surrounding food security to gain greater insight into the study’s measures. l Provide a point of comparison between the regions to understand the dynamics of food security and the mechanisms that may be employed to address the unique issues that are experienced within a region. l Explore the role of regional commonalities— countries within a region tend to have similar environments, problems, solutions and, in some cases, may share common institutions. l Create more accurate country comparisons and a more nuanced understanding of food security by narrowing the frame of analysis. l Offer insight into the economic, political and social context of the results of the 2014 GFSI. A regional analysis of food security
  4. 4. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20143 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Overview On a regional level, structural elements, which are generally more similar within regions than across the globe, tend to play an extremely important role in determining food security. Also, in regions that include countries with different economic systems, policy environments, agricultural infrastructures and nutritional standards, the gap in food security between best and worst performers is wider. These structural elements tend to change little year on year; however, when changes do occur, they have a greater impact on food security than other factors explored in the index. l Economic development has the largest impact on food security, as shown by the strong correlation between food affordability and food security. The top performers in the index are rich countries with developed economies; these tend Regional results and comparisons Ranking/score table of all regions Overall Rank Region 2014 GFSI Score 1 North America 80.0 2 Europe 75.4 3 Middle East and North Africa 57.4 4 Central and South America 56.0 5 Asia and Pacific 55.0 6 Sub-Saharan Africa 36.1 to have relatively high levels of GDP per capita and low shares of household expenditure on food. Although emerging economies are experiencing rapid GDP growth, resulting in increased Affordability scores and greater urban absorption capacity, the gap between developed and developing countries is still great. l The most food-secure countries also tend to have developed infrastructures, including advanced agricultural infrastructures and facilities and systems that support agricultural investment and research and development (R&D). Transport infrastructure, including road and port systems, and adequate crop storage facilities drive food availability and are underdeveloped and undersupplied across food-insecure countries owing to underinvestment.
  5. 5. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20144 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 l A stable, efficient and functional policy environment is crucial for food security. More food-insecure regions, as well as countries, frequently have higher political stability risk and corruption levels, alongside weaker institutions that fail to provide appropriate government regulation and oversight. By contrast, the more food-secure regions have robust policy environments that facilitate food accessibility through stable supply chains, and affordability through food safety-net programmes. l Nutrition plays an important role in determining food security. Highly food-secure countries have diversified diets and a high quality of protein. Their diets contain a high level of micronutrients, including iron and vitamin A. More food-insecure countries are often deprived of nutritious diets and lack organisations that regulate nutritional standards. Regional results North America and Europe, which collectively encompass 29 of the 109 countries in the index, recorded the strongest performances in the GFSI, driven by the developed countries’ dominance of those regions. l As two regions comprised primarily of rich countries, Europe and North America have high levels of GDP per capita at an average of US$32,462 measured in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP), compared with an average of US$9,900 at PPP in the other four regions, while an average of 17.7% of household expenditure goes on food—just over half the global average of 34.5%. l Wealth corresponds with high sufficiency of food supply, developed agricultural infrastructure, strong diet diversification, relatively low political stability risk and low corruption levels (Ukraine and Russia are exceptions). These factors contribute to North America’s and Europe’s first and second place rankings respectively in the overall index and in each of the categories. Availability Rank Region Score 1 North America 76.7 2 Europe 69.8 3 Asia and Pacific 55.6 4 Middle East and North Africa 55.0 5 Central and South America 54.1 6 Sub-Saharan Africa 42.1 Affordability Rank Region Score 1 North America 83.6 2 Europe 80.3 3 Middle East and North Africa 59.1 4 Central and South America 56.8 5 Asia and Pacific 53.9 6 Sub-Saharan Africa 29.2
  6. 6. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20145 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 The next three highest-ranked regions—the Middle East & North Africa (MENA), Central & South America and Asia & Pacific—together account for 52 countries in the index. They all fall within a range of 2.4 points and share several common factors: l They are comprised of a mixture of developed and developing countries that vary in terms of economic and political structures. l MENA’s strong Affordability score (third overall), which is 2.3 points ahead of Central & South America, and its third-place tie in Quality & Safety with Central & South America account for its overall third-place regional rank in the index. l Asia & Pacific’s comparatively high percentage of the population under the global poverty line and low diet diversification explain its lower scores in the Affordability and Quality & Safety categories. Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the lowest regional score in the 2014 GFSI, with an overall score that is just two-thirds that of the Asia & Pacific region. l It also scores the lowest in each of the Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety categories, owing to the large percentage of low-income countries in the region; of the 28 countries included in the region, 18 are low- income, according to World Bank income classifications. l Low agricultural import tariffs and commitment to agricultural research and development, while still weak, are areas of relative strength in comparison with select regions, but underdeveloped agricultural infrastructure, low income levels and poor diet diversification drive the region’s poor results. Quality & Safety Rank Region Score 1 North America 80.3 2 Europe 78.9 =3 Central and South America 59.5 =3 Middle East and North Africa 59.5 5 Asia and Pacific 56.4 6 Sub-Saharan Africa 36.8
  7. 7. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20146 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Europe continues to be placed second among the six regions ranked in the 2014 Global Food Security Index, just behind North America, in each of the three core areas assessed by the index: Affordability, Availability, and Quality & Safety. Overall, the region has a very stable food security environment. Of the 26 European countries in the index, 18 fall into the Best Environment grouping (the top quartile) among the 109 countries ranked; the remaining eight countries are characterised as having a Good Environment (second quartile). With the exception of a handful of countries, food price inflation has been subdued in Europe over the past year, so much so that EU-wide consumer price deflation is still within the realm of possibility in 2014. Fears of a disruptive spike in global commodity prices on the back of geopolitical tensions between Ukraine and Russia have only had a minor impact on food prices to date. The increase in maize and wheat prices in the first quarter of 2014 turned out to be subdued compared with price movements in recent years, and the uptick in oil prices following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March appears to have been temporary. Political stability for Europe as a region did decline slightly, however, as a result of the volatility in Ukraine. The common agricultural policy (CAP) of the EU Food security in Europe 50 100 150 200 250 Jan 2000 Jan 2001 Jan 2002 Jan 2003 Jan 2004 Jan 2005 Jan 2006 Jan 2007 Jan 2008 Jan 2009 Jan 2010 Jan 2011 Jan 2012 Jan 2013 Ukraine Food price inflation Jan 2005=100 Source: Economist Intelligence Unit; FAO.
  8. 8. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20147 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 continues to have a good deal of influence on the food security situation of Europe, given that most European countries included in the GFSI are also EU members. Regional highlights Compared with the 2013 GFSI results, the region’s performance in the Affordability category improved in 2014, supported by a better score in food consumption as a share of household expenditure and, to a lesser extent, a reduction in agricultural import tariffs. A drop in the average most-favoured nation (MFN) agricultural import tariffs among EU countries to 13.2% from 13.9% and Switzerland’s drop from 43.5% to 33.5% are largely responsible for Europe’s improved score on agricultural import tariffs, although all countries in the region experienced a score improvement on this indicator. The decline in the share of household expenditure on food observed in many European countries stems in part from a normalisation of food prices following a spike that was caused by severe drought conditions in eastern Europe in 2010 and in much of western Europe in 2011. Grain harvests in Russia and Ukraine are estimated to have fallen by one-third in 2010, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations. Notwithstanding the levelling-off of food prices, there remains significant heterogeneity in the share of household expenditure on food among European countries, with less than 10% spent in Switzerland and the United Kingdom and almost 40% or more in several east European countries. Regional strengths: Programmes for assistance and production Europe is the top-scoring region in the world in indicators that measure the presence of food safety net programmes, food safety and food loss. The supply-chain infrastructures of national food systems provide Europe with an effective and efficient post-harvest to pre-consumer supply chain that minimises loss of food, resulting in a high score on the food loss indicator. The European Commission’s Communication on Sustainable Food, scheduled to be published in 2014, will set forth additional goals related to food loss and food safety. The strong showing of Europe in the food safety net indicator is also supported by the policy stance of the EU, which has maintained a food aid programme to assist the poor within its borders since 1987. Additional food aid programmes are carried out at the national level by individual European countries. Significant reforms to the CAP agreed in June 2013 are intended to address the changing landscape of food security, among other issues. The reforms will be implemented between 2014 and 2020 and are intended to expand agricultural production while improving the environmental sustainability of agricultural activities. The CAP budget, heavily scrutinised in recent years, will face a ceiling of less than its 2013 level through 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Food loss, by country Total waste/total domestic supply quantity Finland Norway United Kingdom Czech Republic Netherlands Switzerland Russia Hungary Sweden Ireland Belarus Germany France Slovakia Ukraine Portugal Italy Romania Austria Denmark Spain Poland Serbia Belgium Greece Bulgaria Source: Economist Intelligence Unit Averageglobalfoodloss
  9. 9. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20148 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 2020. The CAP reforms also reflect an ongoing turn towards sustainability among EU agricultural policymakers, who have in the past favoured greater intensification (through increasingly mechanised production methods or the use of pesticides and herbicides to enhance yields, for example) to boost agricultural production. Additionally, Europe has set out a plan to gradually increase spending on agricultural innovation and development over the next seven years. The Europe 2020 programme unveiled that the EU has plans to spend 3% of its GDP on agricultural research and development (R&D), an increase from approximately 1.9% today. Regional weaknesses: Urbanisation and volatility Despite its excellent overall performance in the three categories of the 2014 GFSI, Europe has its weak points. The region only scores ahead of the Middle East & North Africa in volatility of agricultural production and urban absorption capacity. Relatively high volatility in agricultural production is mainly attributable to large swings in production in east European economies such as Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Russia and Ukraine over the past 20 years. The eastward expansion of the EU over time, however, has allowed a growing number of agricultural producers access to income support and safety nets under the auspices of the CAP. Negative average real GDP growth in 2012-14 in seven European countries (Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Finland and the Czech Republic), coupled with the region having 22 of the 25 lowest average real GDP growth rates of the countries in the GFSI, account for Europe’s poor score in urban absorption capacity. Although European countries had 20 of the 25 lowest urbanisation rates (2010-12 average), low urbanisation did not counter the poor GDP growth rates recorded throughout Europe, owing in part to the global financial crisis from which Europe is still recovering. However, in the rich, developed economies of western Europe low urban absorption capacity does not pose as big a risk to food security as it does in developing countries, where high urbanisation and low growth can result in insufficient food supply. The less developed countries of eastern Europe—Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Poland, Bulgaria and Belarus—had the highest regional scores on this indicator owing to extremely low urbanisation rates and high GDP growth compared with western Europe. These countries drove Europe’s score improvement in the indicator from the 2013 GFSI, resulting in better urban absorption capacity than in the Middle East & North Africa, which experienced rapid urbanisation and low growth. -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 Average real GDP growth— 25 lowest performers Average percentage real change, 2012-14 Syria Greece Portugal Italy Spain Netherlands Finland Czech Republic France Hungary Denmark Serbia Belgium Sudan Ukraine Ireland Austria Germany Bulgaria Sweden United Kingdom Japan Belarus El Salvador Slovakia Source: Economist Intelligence Unit
  10. 10. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 20149 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 The countries of Europe Europe is a geographically contiguous region whose countries are differentiated by economic and social conditions. Long-time EU member countries, as well as non-EU countries with high per-capita incomes such as Norway and Switzerland, tend to do very well in the GFSI, while east European countries that are either EU newcomers or non-members score relatively poorly. Provisions for financial support for EU farmers gives agricultural producers in EU countries an advantage over those in non-EU countries, while robust EU oversight of food safety standards and the presence of food safety net programmes help ensure food security at the household level. Despite their comparatively lower scores within Europe as a whole, east European countries have well-developed agricultural sectors by international standards. Russia and Ukraine are major global suppliers of wheat, for example. There remains, however, a significant gap between these countries and those in western Europe in terms of land productivity, quality of agricultural infrastructure and availability of credit for producers. Addressing these weaknesses would allow Russia and Ukraine to increase yields and decrease volatility in production, thus paving the way for them to play a larger role in ensuring food security on a global level. High political stability risk and corruption levels in both these countries, however, continue to impact production and overall food stability. Country highlights Most individual European countries saw incremental improvements in their overall GFSI scores for 2014. Food affordability improved in every country relative to the 2013 index, driven by falling agricultural import tariffs and a decline in the share of household expenditure dedicated to food. Although the drop in average import tariffs among EU countries was a factor in the better tariff score among European countries, policies at the national level were also influential. Switzerland, for example, has been reducing protectionist measures in its agricultural sector in recent years as part of agreements to relax trade restrictions with the EU. Europe is unique in that the score disparity between the ten best-performing countries in the region is extremely low, reflecting high incomes and EU policies that focus on food security. The range of scores at the low end is much larger, with the bottom ten countries in the region differentiated in particular by GDP per capita and public expenditure on agricultural R&D as a share of agricultural GDP. As in past years, west European countries tend to score better than those in eastern Europe. Food security successes Austria is this year’s top-scoring European country, closely followed by the Netherlands and Norway. In fact, Austria scores more highly than every country in the world except the United States. EU policy directives without a doubt contribute to Austria’s
  11. 11. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 201410 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 good performance in areas such as food safety net programmes, access to financing for farmers, nutritional standards and food safety, but national agricultural development policy is also a factor. The majority of agricultural production in Austria is done on small- and medium-sized farms, and a large share of farming activity is carried out in “less-favoured areas”. While these features do not favour Austria as a natural global leader in the production of agricultural goods, they have made national policymakers sensitive to the need for high-quality rural development plans and environmentally sustainable farming methods, which has resulted in policies such as the Austrian Agri-environmental Programme (ÖPUL). Serbia shows the largest jump in overall score among the European countries in the index, which is mainly attributable to a reduction in food consumption as a share of household expenditure and a drop in volatility of agricultural production. Lower political stability risk and an increase in urban absorption capacity outweighed decreases in diet diversification and the GDP per capita score. Slovakia also experienced a large score increase, driven by a decline in volatility of agricultural production and a lower share of household expenditure on food. Food security challenges Ukraine and Bulgaria are the poorest performers among the European countries included in the GFSI. GDP per capita in both countries is below the regional average, as is public expenditure on agricultural R&D. Corruption continues to present a particular challenge for Ukraine, as does its weak political stability. Although Ukraine and Bulgaria lag the remainder of European countries, they are not particularly food insecure vis-à-vis the rest of the world. Placed 50th (Bulgaria) and 52nd (Ukraine), both countries rank comfortably within the top half of the 109 countries considered in the index. Perhaps unexpectedly, France and Belgium lost ground in the index in 2014. Both countries experienced a decline in their share of GDP dedicated to agricultural R&D, while France also suffered a setback in its political risk environment. France’s decline in political stability risk is related to the process of fiscal adjustment currently under way. Public discontent with the manner in which the president, François Hollande, is carrying out budget reforms is on the rise, with the population taking particular issue with his administration’s initial favouring of tax increases rather than spending cuts. Spending, however, has also been cut, which in turn is reflected in lower public expenditure on agricultural GDP as a share of agricultural GDP. The changes in score, though small, were enough to bump France from second place to tenth globally, while Belgium slipped from ninth place to 14th. Agricultural import rates—Europe % Source: Economist Intelligence Unit Ukraine EU countries Russia Belarus Serbia Switzerland Norway 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 2013 2014
  12. 12. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 201411 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Appendix Asia & Pacific Central & South America Europe Middle East & North Africa North America Sub-Saharan Africa Australia Argentina Austria Algeria Canada Angola Azerbaijan Bolivia Belarus Egypt Mexico Benin Bangladesh Brazil Belgium Israel United States Botswana Cambodia Chile Bulgaria Jordan Burkina Faso China Colombia Czech Republic Kuwait Burundi India Costa Rica Denmark Morocco Cameroon Indonesia Dominican Republic Finland Saudi Arabia Chad Japan Ecuador France Syria Congo (Dem. Rep.) Kazakhstan El Salvador Germany Tunisia Côte d’Ivoire Malaysia Guatemala Greece Turkey Ethiopia Myanmar Haiti Hungary United Arab Emirates Ghana Nepal Honduras Ireland Yemen Guinea New Zealand Nicaragua Italy Kenya Pakistan Panama Netherlands Madagascar Philippines Paraguay Norway Malawi Singapore Peru Poland Mali South Korea Uruguay Portugal Mozambique Sri Lanka Venezuela Romania Niger Tajikistan Russia Nigeria Thailand Serbia Rwanda Uzbekistan Slovakia Senegal Vietnam Spain Sierra Leone Sweden South Africa Switzerland Sudan Ukraine Tanzania United Kingdom Togo Uganda Zambia Country selection table
  13. 13. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 201412 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Appendix These tables list the rankings and scores for Europe in the overall index and across the three categories (Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety). Overall Ranking Affordability Overall Rank Country Score Rank Country Score 1 Austria 85.5 1 Switzerland 90.0 =2 Netherlands 84.4 2 Norway 89.7 =2 Norway 84.4 3 Austria 89.4 4 Switzerland 84.2 4 Ireland 89.2 5 Ireland 84.0 =5 Denmark 88.4 6 Germany 83.7 =5 Sweden 88.4 7 France 83.4 7 Germany 88.2 8 Denmark 83.3 8 Netherlands 88.0 9 Sweden 82.4 9 United Kingdom 87.8 10 Belgium 82.0 10 Belgium 87.5 11 United Kingdom 81.6 11 Finland 86.6 12 Portugal 80.3 12 France 85.9 13 Finland 79.9 13 Italy 84.2 14 Spain 79.8 14 Spain 83.9 15 Italy 77.6 15 Czech Republic 81.6 16 Czech Republic 74.6 16 Portugal 80.8 17 Greece 74.3 17 Hungary 78.8 18 Poland 72.7 18 Poland 78.6 19 Hungary 71.2 19 Slovakia 77.9 20 Slovakia 69.8 20 Greece 77.3 21 Russia 62.7 21 Russia 70.7 22 Serbia 61.6 22 Bulgaria 69.8 23 Romania 61.3 23 Serbia 65.9 24 Belarus 60.8 24 Belarus 61.1 25 Bulgaria 59.6 25 Romania 58.9 26 Ukraine 56.4 26 Ukraine 58.7 Availability Quality & Safety Rank Country Score Rank Country Score 1 Austria 82.8 =1 France 87.6 2 Netherlands 81.3 =1 Portugal 87.6 3 Germany 80.9 3 Greece 86.8 4 Switzerland 80.2 4 Spain 85.0 5 Norway 80.1 5 Italy 84.9 6 France 79.7 6 Ireland 84.6 7 Ireland 79.1 7 Netherlands 84.2 8 Denmark 78.5 8 Denmark 83.6 9 Portugal 77.1 9 Austria 83.4 10 Sweden 76.9 10 Finland 82.9 11 Belgium 76.8 11 Norway 82.8 12 United Kingdom 76.2 12 Sweden 82.4 13 Spain 74.1 13 Belgium 82.2 14 Finland 72.7 14 Switzerland 80.9 15 Italy 68.9 15 United Kingdom 80.8 16 Czech Republic 67.1 16 Germany 80.5 17 Greece 67.0 17 Czech Republic 77.5 18 Poland 66.3 18 Hungary 76.6 19 Slovakia 62.7 19 Poland 75.7 20 Hungary 62.3 20 Russia 74.3 21 Romania 59.1 21 Romania 73.6 22 Belarus 58.1 22 Slovakia 68.9 23 Serbia 56.0 23 Belarus 67.4 24 Russia 51.2 24 Ukraine 66.7 25 Ukraine 50.6 25 Serbia 66.1 26 Bulgaria 48.7 26 Bulgaria 64.1
  14. 14. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 201413 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Appendix These tables list the year-on-year score changes, 2014 v 2013, for Europe in the overall index and across the three categories (Affordability, Availability and Quality & Safety). Overall Ranking Affordability Country Y-o-Y change Country Y-o-Y change Serbia 5.0 Bulgaria 10.6 Slovakia 4.4 Serbia 7.1 Portugal 3.4 United Kingdom 5.2 United Kingdom 2.9 Greece 5.0 Greece 2.9 Poland 4.6 Bulgaria 2.8 Portugal 4.0 Austria 1.9 Austria 3.4 Poland 1.8 Czech Republic 3.3 Italy 1.7 Ukraine 3.2 Germany 1.5 Hungary 3.0 Spain 1.5 France 2.9 Ireland 1.4 Italy 2.7 Denmark 1.0 Ireland 2.6 Norway 0.8 Germany 2.6 Sweden 0.7 Spain 2.4 Czech Republic 0.7 Denmark 2.1 Hungary 0.5 Slovakia 2.1 Netherlands 0.4 Sweden 1.9 Switzerland 0.2 Russia 1.8 Belarus 0.1 Finland 1.6 Belgium -0.5 Norway 1.6 Finland -0.5 Belarus 1.4 France -0.6 Switzerland 1.1 Russia -0.7 Belgium 0.8 Ukraine -1.6 Netherlands 0.7 Romania -3.0 Romania 0.3 Availability Quality & Safety Country Y-o-Y change Country Y-o-Y change Slovakia 8.2 Belarus 1.4 Serbia 5.0 Czech Republic 1.2 Portugal 3.6 Ukraine 1.0 Greece 2.0 Austria 0.6 United Kingdom 1.9 Finland 0.6 Spain 1.4 Portugal 0.6 Italy 1.3 Germany 0.6 Ireland 1.3 Poland 0.4 Austria 1.0 Denmark 0.3 Germany 0.8 Norway 0.3 Norway 0.3 Italy 0.2 Denmark 0.3 Sweden 0.2 Netherlands 0.2 Netherlands 0.1 Sweden -0.2 Switzerland 0.1 Poland -0.2 France 0.1 Switzerland -0.6 Greece 0.0 Belarus -1.6 Russia 0.0 Hungary -1.7 Slovakia -0.2 Belgium -1.8 United Kingdom -0.2 Czech Republic -1.9 Hungary -0.2 Finland -2.9 Serbia -0.2 Bulgaria -3.0 Belgium -0.4 Russia -3.2 Bulgaria -0.4 France -4.0 Spain -0.6 Romania -6.7 Romania -0.8 Ukraine -6.8 Ireland -1.0
  15. 15. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 201414 Food security in focus: Europe 2014 Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this information, neither The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. nor the sponsor of this report can accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this white paper or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in the white paper. Cover:Getty
  16. 16. London 20 Cabot Square London E14 4QW United Kingdom Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476 E-mail: NewYork 750 Third Avenue 5th Floor New York, NY 10017 United States Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Fax: (1.212) 586 0248 E-mail: HongKong 6001, Central Plaza 18 Harbour Road Wanchai Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2585 3888 Fax: (852) 2802 7638 E-mail: Geneva Boulevard des Tranchées 16 1206 Geneva Switzerland Tel: (41) 22 566 2470 Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47 E-mail: