Food Security in Focus: Europe

Sponsoredby
A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit
Food securityinfocus:
Europe 2014

© The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2014
1
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.
Preface
Contents
A regional
analysis of food
security 2
Regional
results and
comparisons 3
Food security in
Europe 6
The countries
of Europe 9
Appendix 11

2
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

3
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.

4
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
2 Europe 69.8
Affordability
Rank Region Score
2 Europe 80.3

5
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
2 Europe 78.9
=3 Central and South America 59.5
=3 Middle East and North Africa 59.5

6
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.

7
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
Average
global
food
loss

8
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

9
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

10
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
%
Ukraine EU countries Russia Belarus Serbia Switzerland Norway
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2013 2014

11
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

12
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

13
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

14
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

London
20 Cabot Square
London
E14 4QW
United Kingdom
Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000
Fax: (44.20) 7576 8476
E-mail: london@eiu.com
NewYork
750 Third Avenue
5th Floor
New York, NY 10017
United States
Tel: (1.212) 554 0600
Fax: (1.212) 586 0248
E-mail: newyork@eiu.com
HongKong
6001, Central Plaza
18 Harbour Road
Wanchai
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2585 3888
Fax: (852) 2802 7638
E-mail: hongkong@eiu.com
Geneva
Boulevard des
Tranchées 16
1206 Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: (41) 22 566 2470
Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47
E-mail: geneva@eiu.com

Food Security in Focus: Europe

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (16)

Destacado

Destacado (17)

Más de DuPont

Más de DuPont (10)

Food Security in Focus: Europe