Epsilon Open Archive

There are agricultural and rural entrepreneurs who today experience a high workload, financial burden, frustration, and stress linked to legislative and regulatory bureaucracy, which is a serious barrier to growth and development in the sector. This study quantified the time requirements and costs of government-related tasks burdening different agricultural and rural sectors and analyzed their effects. Some recommendations for reducing the current regulatory burden and bureaucracy facing Swedish agricultural and rural businesses were formulated.

Data collection involved analysis of changes in the number of regulations imposed on farms businesses in the period 1996-2016. In online diaries, around 50 agricultural entrepreneurs recorded the time spent annually on collection, organization, and reporting of data and the cost of administration, supervision, and authorization tasks. Interviews were held with 30 agricultural entrepreneurs, government officials, and agricultural advisors regarding their experiences of legislative and regulatory bureaucracy in Swedish agriculture.

In the 20-year period studied, the number of legal regulations affecting Swedish farmers increased by 120%. These predominantly affected farms combining dairy and beef production with plant production (approx. 450 legal regulations). During the same period, regulations on submission of agricultural records increased by 340% (from 5 to 22) and number of occasions when a notification or permit was required increased by 450% (from 6 to 33). This increasing bureaucracy takes time to manage and entails a cost and mental burden for the entrepreneurs. The administrative activity reported to take most time was recording, marking, and reporting on animals, the cost of which (per animal unit) was five-fold higher for sheep than for dairy and beef cattle. Preparation, implementation, and follow-up on official inspections also required much time. More than 70% of the entrepreneurs participating in the study were inspected at least once every six months and almost 30% of these were inspected by both the relevant authority and the industry during the same sixmonth period. Thus the entrepreneurs wanted municipalities, authorities, and the industry to coordinate or collaborate on inspections.

Most participating agricultural entrepreneurs were generally satisfied with their government inspections, but considered it a major problem when the inspector lacked relevant experience, especially in animal welfare. The entrepreneurs believed that the inspection outcome was partly dependent on the actual inspector or municipal authority performing the inspection. The government officials surveyed reported that they worked in consensus with the authorities and believed they were sometimes unfairly criticized in the media. The entrepreneurs viewed cross-compliance inspections as particularly problematic and tough, as results could have major financial consequences.

Swedish politicians have long wanted to simplify the regulations on agricultural and rural entrepreneurs, and some authorities have been tasked by government with reducing bureaucracy in agriculture. The outcomes vary between authorities and years, with some simplifications benefiting the entrepreneurs and some benefiting the authorities.