Download

Functional Review and Institutional Design of Ministries
Functional Review of the
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development
FRIDOM – Functional Review and Institutional Design of Ministries is a DFID-funded project, implemented by
HELM Corporation, Consulting and Public Management Group, Governance institute Slovakia and Altair
Asesores.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
0. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THE APPROACH
3. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE PRESENT SITUATION
a) GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
b) OVERALL INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
c) IMPLICATIONS OF THE EU INTEGRATION PROCESS
d) THE ROLE OF MAFRD
e) CAPACITY OF MAFRD
4. THE RECOMMENDATIONS – THE REFORM CONCEPT
a) THE ESSENCE OF THE REFORM
b) SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGE
FOR MAFRD CONSIDERATION
FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT CONSIDERATION
5. THE RECOMMENDATIONS – THE REFORM IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
a) THE BASIC APPROACH
b) REORIENTATION OF WORK PROGRAMME AND STAFF RESOURCES
c) REORGANIZATION OF STRUCTURES
d) THE TIME SCHEDULE
e) RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS
6. ANNEXES
A THE CONSULTANT‟S TERMS OF REFERENCE
B THE WORKING SCHEDULE OF THE REVIEW
C LIST OF MEETINGS
D BIBLIOGRAPHY
E THE LOGIC AND WORKFLOW OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
F CURRENT ORGANIGRAM OF MAFRD
G MANDATES OF THE NEW OR ADJUSTED MAFRD ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS
H THE MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES REQUIRED BY THE EU ACQUIS
COMMUNAUTAIRE
I NOTE ON PAYING AGENCY
J ABBREVIATIONS
K THE SUMMARY PRESENTATION
2

0. Executive summary
In the framework of a DFID financed TA project (FRIDOM) a specialist team has examined the
agricultural and rural development sector as well as the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural
Development as for their institutional capacity and performance.
The Team found that the government has just recently transferred the Ministry‟s animal health,
veterinary, phytosanitary and food safety components (around 130 professionals) to the Prime
Minister‟s Office, where they were fusioned with the Ministry of Health‟s sanitary control component.
While this unusual measure unifies the – for the EU delicate – services under one command, it creates
supervisory and coordination problems internally and representation problems abroad. The Review
Team recommends, that the experience be reviewed in 2011 and the arrangement reconsidered, if
necessary.
The Team also found that the Ministry‟s mandate does not cover all agriculture-related issues of
Kosovo, and called on the Ministry to widen its, at least monitoring, horizon.
The key observation is, that in its current state the Ministry is not well prepared yet to serve the EU
integration process.
The main conclusion of the essentially functional review was threefold:
MAFRD should refocus its work-program from supply-centered to demand- and
sustainability centered, EU-related, economics-inspired activities;
MAFRD should streamline its substantive structures for effectiveness and cost-efficiency
sake and reduce its top-heaviness improving thereby staff motivation;
MAFRD should press the Government to systematically improve civil service employment
conditions in order to raise competition and retain quality staff.
The Review Team proposed a new organigram for MAFRD and defined new departmental mandates.
Furthermore, it put forward a methodology for the proposed change. It stated, that hardly any
additional manpower resources are required, however some assistance would be necessary for
refocusing the Ministry‟s work. It estimated, that the organizational transition can easily take place in 6
months, while the substantive reorientation of Ministry staff will go into mid-term and the upgrading of
ministerial performance through HR improvements even into longer term.
In sum, change is necessary and the proposed reform is feasible. Continuous efforts on the human
resources development side are preconditions for real progress.
3

1. Introduction
This report contains findings and recommendations of the functional review of the Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development (MAFRD) portfolio. As such it covers only the Ministry
and its relationship to the agencies reporting to the Ministry either directly or indirectly. The objective of
the functional review is to propose a clear and coherent organizational structure of the MTC making it
into an effective Ministry that steers and coordinates policies in the area of transport and
communications in line with European integration requirements and priorities.
In February 2007, the Government of Kosovo made the functional review and reorganization of its
administrative structure a key objective of its newly published Public Administration Reform Strategy.
To implement this objective the Functional Review and Institutional Design of Ministries (FRIDOM)
project was launched in April 2008 with the support of the United Kingdom‟s Department of
International Development (DFID). It involves all ministries, except for the newly created Foreign
Affairs and Defense ministries, as well as 14 so called horizontal reviews that cover functions cutting
across all ministries, for example, policy management, coordination of the EU integration process,
donor coordination, government communications coordination, diversity management, anti corruptions,
and public expenditure management.
Most Central and Eastern European countries have undertaken similar functional reviews processes in
the lead-up to European accession. As these experiences show, there is a high risk that the
recommendations from functional reviews done by external consultants are not implemented.
Therefore, Kosovo‟s approach to functional reviews is that recommendations from reviews will be
translated into institutional Strategic Development Plans (SDPs) of ministries by the relevant
institutions themselves and will also further update Kosovo‟s Public Administration Reform Strategy.
As part of the review, the FRIDOM Team has prepared this analytical report. It outlines options for
restructuring and capacity development of the MAFRD. According to standard FRIDOM methodology
used in all ministries and institutions, the report is based on extensive interviews with the MAFRD staff
and various external stakeholders. It is also based on analysis of relevant normative acts of the
Republic of Kosovo as well as various policy and project documents. The recommendations also take
into account the relevant findings and recommendations contained in the European Commission‟s
2008 and 2009 Progress Reports on Kosovo and relevant external assessments. Comparisons with
selected other states – mostly small EU Members with recent EU accession experience are used to
inform the analysis underpinning recommendations. Finally, this Report builds on the findings,
conclusions and recommendations of FRIDOM‟s 14 horizontal reviews.
The report is structured into three major parts. Section I provides analysis of the present situation, the
mission, competences, institutional structure and overall organizational capacity issues within the
MAFRD. Section II contains recommendations towards specific reform concept functions of the
MAFRD. Section III summarizes the reform implementation strategy and organizational changes in
MAFRD.
The review took place between mid May and mid October 2009 with the final presentation of findings
and recommendations scheduled for October 16, 2009. The working schedule and the list of meetings
held are exhibited in annex-b and annex-c respectively. Annex-d lists the written resources
consulted.
The outcome will reflect the views of the Review Team with due regard to the views of the Ministry‟s
Working Group on Reform. It will, however, engage the responsibility of the Review Team only.
It should be noted, that quite a few recommendations of this review go against formerly issued and
presently valid government regulations and administrative instructions. The Review Team thinks this is
natural. First, as time passes and conditions change, responses have to change, too. What was or
seemed useful at the time of establishment of the new Kosovar Government, might not be purposeful
anymore after years of dynamic development. Secondly, the mandate of the Review Team originates
from the Kosovar Government itself meaning, that the Government itself wants constructive criticism
on its present institutional structures and seeks suggestions as to how to adjust them. Once these
proposals come in from all the 16 vertical (ministerial) reviews and all the 14 horizontal (inter
ministerial) reviews, the Government itself will weigh the merits of the proposals for change and
decide, what to implement in the best interest of the country.
4

2. The approach
On the basis of official Kosovar policy statements it was assumed for the present exercise, that
Kosovo aims at freedom, self-determination, democracy and market economy with social orientation.
The country recognizes the importance of the human right declaration of the United Nations and
respects the fundamental declarations of the European Union. Moreover, it intends to prepare for
membership in the Union. This declared set of political goals and values provides for the general
orientation of Kosovo‟s public administration and serves thus as directive for the present review.
From the above it follows that the country intends also to respect and apply the principles of “good
governance”. These have been defined in different ways by different international instances. Their
essence can be summarized as follows:
a) rule of law: the enactment by the peoples‟ representation of rights and duties of both
individuals and institutions into a legal framework binding for everyone and the
establishment of a judiciary system guaranteeing its functioning and enforcement;
b) transparency: the visibility/understandability of public decision making and of public
procedures for the general public establishing credibility of operations; public availability of
information (all aiming at far-reaching participation and avoidance of corruption);
c) equity: equal opportunity of access of all to goods and services;
d) effectiveness and efficiency: the imperative to use public resources (people, funds and
goods/facilities) optimally;
e) accountability: all public units and all public officials are responsible for their doing and
performance.
These fundamental principles of good public administration have been guiding the Review Team in its
judgments.
Professionally the method of work the Review Team has applied was that of “functional analysis”. The
logic and workflow of this method are described in annex -e. Its essence can be summarized in the
following.
Where there is no function (= the need to continuously performing some duty), there is no job. If there
is a job, it can be of different type. Basically:
concept development, concept analysis, that are policy analysis, policy and strategy or
programme development, legislative work, planning and forecasting, minimum standards
and norms development, evaluation, we might call the “policy function” or P;
coordinating the relationship between different bodies, supervision or monitoring of the
performance of subsidiary bodies, the profession calls “coordinating function” or C;
licensing, certification, permissions, accreditation, inspection, compliance control and
financial audit one calls “regulatory function” or R;
provision of products or services to internal (other public) customers or external (farmers,
foresters, fishermen) customers; this is called “service delivery function” or D;
financial management, human management, information systems, infrastructure
establishment and maintenance, secretarial servicing, staff training, efficiency review and
management audit implying “support functions” or S.
As the long experience of mankind with public administration has proven, there are functions one can
well combine. Combination of others leads usually to trouble. The more important rules are listed
hereunder:
separate regulatory functions (R) from those policy functions (P) that determine the
regulation;
separate regulatory functions (R) from service delivery functions (D) that provide service to
customers;
service delivery (D) should be normally performed by sub-ordinate or supervised bodies;
policy functions (P) and mostly also coordinating functions (C) should be performed by the
principal institution (e.g. the ministry);
the support function (S) should be kept apart from other functions.
5

On top of the above public administration fundamentals that determine basic structures, one needs to
apply in any public institution the norms of efficient management, that affect actual performance. They
are numerous, too many, to be listed. Some, however, are most relevant:
do not establish a parallel administration,
abolish (a post or unit) or privatize, whenever not against public interest,
decentralize or delegate whenever feasible.
The Review Team has taken its information from various sources. These are:
the body of laws and regulations currently in force,
existing organogramms, programme descriptions, evaluations, job descriptions,
interviews with the management and relevant staff of MAFRD, of the Food and
Veterinary Agency, the Forestry Agency, one MAFRD regional office, one sample
municipality, some project personnel, some farmers and entrepreneurs and
the wealth of information brought along by the local and the international
consultants.
In the review work due consideration has been given to the fact that:
# Kosovo is a newly independent country at an early stage of development of its
statehood, where basic institutions might still need streamlining on one hand, however,
care should be taken of needs of national specificities, on the other;
# Kosovo is a relatively small country, therefore comparison in structure and procedures
can be - and in fact has been - made with other six relatively small recent EU member
countries (the three Baltic countries, Finland, Slovakia and Slovenia),
# Kosovo aspires for EU membership, consequently EU standards need to be
approximated in adjusting rules and structures; (in fact the “EU Guide to the main
administrative structures required for implementing the acquis”, CEC, 2005, has been
used as benchmark in the current review work).
6

3. Conclusions of the analysis of the present situation
3.1 General observations
In the short time since independence Kosovo has established a functioning legislative (parliament), a
separate executive (government) and an independent judiciary (courts of justice); the latter is reputedly
weak (as in most post-communist and developing countries); however, generally fundamental public
structures are in place; the Administration has the basic human, material and financial resources at its
disposal; there is visible dynamism in the society, will for development, many young people, who have
seen the modern world and know to communicate, fill the streets of the capital, so achievements are
considerable. Nevertheless obstacles to advancement exist amply in form of corruption, old-fashioned
management and some traditional attitudes. If Kosovo‟s goal is the European Union, Kosovo‟s agenda
must be busy.
The agricultural/rural sector has managed to repair much of the damage caused by the war, but
remains rather static pending progressive structural transformations in the future. In institutional terms
(legislation, organizational structures) considerable progress has been made in the past few years,
however the EU ambitions of the country create heavy pressure for MAFRD.
No agricultural census has been held in this country since 1961. Also, the last accepted population
census dates back to 1981. No basic post-war agro-economic information is thus available for
planning or evaluation. The Administration works with fragmented surveys done by municipalities,
subject-specific estimates of specialized offices (such as veterinary or export-import monitoring) or
direct field-experience made by the various ministry departments and donor-financed projects. This
situation is a handicap. The issue of agricultural census should be taken up with UN/FAO in any case
soon.
Agro-economically MAFRD‟s summing up of the situation is correct: „ the agricultural sub-sector
(including agro-processing) is not consolidated. It is by far short of supplies for its own market that now
heavily depends on imports. This leads to additional costs for food products, endangers general
welfare, prevents the accumulation of capital and consequently also investment into the sector.‟
3.2 The overall institutional framework
3.2.1 The private sector institutions
Agricultural production units are reported to be small (few hectares) and fragmented. It is not
surprising in these circumstances, that associations exist only in few branches (apples, strawberries,
milk) and only in few regions. This is mostly the case, understandably, where need arises for common
facilities (such as cooling and storage) or where ever the organization of inputs requires a
producer/user association.
As natural, the situation is somewhat better in the agro-industry. Dairy, meat-processing, milling
associations are reported to exist, though none of them seems really nationwide and capable of
professional interest-representation. Neither a general farmers‟ association, nor a chamber of
agriculture has been formed yet meaning, that the institutional structure of the private agricultural
sector is yet to develop. The situation seems similar in the forestry (where the state is by far the
biggest owner) and in the rural development sector.
The absence of strong private institutions makes the Government‟s role simple on one hand, as no
internal representative criticism is likely to be formed by members of the sector to obstacle government
decisions. A straight top-down governing is currently possible. On the other hand, this is a weakness.
Constructive professional opposition, joint work on standards, rules and legislation with interested and
organized agricultural producers, processors and traders forces governments to circumspect
preparation and pertinent decision making in other countries. Strong rural partnership would be an
asset for the Government also in Kosovo even in preparation for the EU negotiations.
7

3.2.2 The public sector institutions
As it stands in June 2009, the entire agriculture- and rural development related inventory of public
institutions is as follows:
the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development (MAFRD),
the Food and Veterinary Agency attached to the Prime Minister‟s Office,
six regional agricultural offices as part of MAFRD,
one to five agricultural officials financed by and under the command of each of the 30
municipalities;
the Kosovo Property Agency administering private land and buildings pending legal
clarifications and transfer to the private owners,
the Kosovo Privatization Agency (ex Kosovo Trust Agency) administering the remainder
of public agro-industry and socially owned enterprises,
the Faculty for Agriculture at Pristina University,
four secondary schools of agricultural orientation and a few schools with classes on
agricultural topics,
the land cadastre under the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning (up to July 2009
in the Ministry of public Services).
Some donor financed projects fall into the category of public-private activities supervised under the
authority of MAFRD.
This is the current agricultural institutional structure overall. It is proposed to examine it hereunder from
bottom to top.
3.2.2.1 The municipality level
The current number of municipalities in Kosovo is 30. All of them pay a number of officials for
agriculture-related duties such as inspection, rural development advisory services, agricultural
monitoring and data collection, etc. depending on the nature, needs and means of the municipality.
The number of staff varies between 3 and 8. The jobs are defined according to the local requirements,
the Ministry has no say as to the mandate and duty of these officials.
An official agreement has been concluded to regulate communication and cooperation. This,
reportedly, does not function satisfactorily. Yet there is some ad-hoc coordination in mutual interest.
At present communication between municipalities and MAFRD takes place through both channels,
directly and through the MAFRD Regional Offices. There is room for improvement in this respect on
both sides, particularly in view of the recent KFVA establishment in the PMO.
Municipal Agricultural Offices do seem to have sufficient access to national and international/EU
information. The need in this respect is rather the selection of the most important and relevant
information, a sort of professional guidance MAFRD might provide to orient collective thinking and
action. Also national standards ought to be set by MAFRD in order to harmonize municipality
performance with the national requirements. One should note: the appropriate mobilization of this
corps of around 150 professionals is crucial for Kosovo‟s agricultural and rural development.
Municipalities complain that the limitation on transportation means limits also their performance. This
is, of course, a problem, they themselves have to solve in first line.
3.2.2.2 The regional level
For agricultural administration purpose the country is divided into six regions (including Pristina).The
regional offices are financed by the budget of the MAFRD, are under direct supervision of MAFRD but
in a peculiar way: each substantive officer reports to its own substantive division, so that the regional
unit is not a group acting as a group but rather a collection of individual professionals under the same
roof each representing its respective head office/Ministry department. There is a local administrative
coordinator though, responsible for administrative issues only.
The function of these offices extend from delivery of information on policies to data collection,
information on regulatory issues and provision of licenses, service delivery through rural advisory
8

services. Currently they also perform phytosanitary inspection, however this function will now be
transferred to KFVA in line with the February 2009
Disposition.
The regional offices could play the role of coordinator, an extension of MAFRD in the field. However,
municipalities prefer to work directly with MAFRD in Pristina. This is an issue MAFRD should tackle
evaluating past experience and weighing future options.
Also for the Regional Offices mobility is a problem as only one vehicle per office is available for 4 to 6
staff. Unless this limiting factor can be handled efficiency will remain decreased.
3.2.2.3 The national level
The Food and Veterinary Agency
Until February 2009 animal health and veterinary control as well as veterinary and phytosanitary
inspection including border control have been integral part of MAFRD, while sanitary inspection and
control were part of the Ministry of Health. By the food law approved in February 2009, these services
were united in one agency under the direct supervision of the Prime Ministers Office; reportedly in
order to avoid competency disputes between those two ministries in the future.
The Agency is supposed to be a purely implementing – as opposed to policy making, legislation
preparing – institution. Given its closeness to the power-centre, it is however questionable, whether
this provision is going to be respected and whether the Agency and MAFRD intend and succeed in
establishing proper working relations with each other. The international representation is anyhow likely
to become a problematic issue.
According to the law, the task of the Agency is to protect human life and health by ensuring high level
of food safety including feed, animal health, animal welfare as well as food of animal and plant origin.
More specifically, in order to protect human health and life, the Agency is called to control, examine
and inspect food and its raw materials in all stages of the food chain. Notably, it is to:
- control and inspect production, processing, packaging, re-packaging, storage, transport,
trade, import and export of food and its raw-materials,
- grant, suspend and withdraw registrations and approvals connected to its
tasks,
- integrate and elaborate research and identification systems on food and its
raw-materials,
- supervise the compliance of the relevant legislation in the food chain,
- advise other official bodies in relation to drafting and applying international standards in
the field of food safety,
- maintain contacts with international institutions regarding to issues relating to this topic.
The Agency receives its budget from MAFRD up to end 2009; thereafter through the PMO. The KFVA
will itself do its procurement. It employs 112 persons on regular basis of which 30 are veterinarians, 18
phytosanitary specialists, the remainder technical and support staff. Further 34 persons are employed
on contractual basis mainly at border control points and warehouses. During 2009 further staff, mainly
sanitary and phytosanitary inspectors, are supposed to join the Agency.
The Agency is well accommodated, well equipped and most of its relatively young professional staff
speaks at least one European language, mostly English. That facilitates EU work and new contacts.
The Agency is supported by an operational twinning arrangement.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development
The Ministry consists of 35 posts at the upper management level, 87 posts at the technical level and
around 400 posts (Kosovo Forestry Agency) at the implementation level. Its technical core is
organized in six departments – organigram attached as annex-f. The Kosovo Forestry Agency is to
lose around 280 forests guards to municipal offices this year as the Government is about to approve
this decentralization move. The KFVA was part of the Ministry as an implementation body (subordinate
institution like the Forestry Agency) up to the current year. As the implications of the recent Food Law
9

are progressively interpreted, it might still take over from MAFRD another dozen posts in form of
inspectors leaving the plant and animal production departments of MAFRD in ruins.
MAFRD as an institution strikes by three main characteristics:
firstly, its embrional and in attractive employment system;
secondly its organizational shortcomings,
thirdly its focus on outdated priorities.
The weakness of the employment system characterizes of course the whole government and
handicaps the public sector performance at large. The remuneration level is not competitive, the
system does not reward seniority in service, has no incentives for higher level performance, does not
offer career development opportunities, etc.. One meets again and again professionals who have left
public service for free lance work or for the private sector.
(In fact technical assistance is a competitor for the government on the employment market.) The
negative effects are reinforced by some nepotism in line with traditions that hampers equity- and
transparency-aimed recruitment efforts.
There are efforts under way (three draft laws in the pipeline) to correct this situation at least to some
extent. MAFRD naturally will have to rely on them and see to it that it takes its share of responsibility in
implementation. Moreover, MAFRD could institute special measures for strengthening human
resources management.
The organizational shortcomings become visible in course of the functional analysis. Regulatory
functions are mixed with service delivery and coordination functions, partly even with policy. Service
delivery (e.g. Kosovo Institute of Agriculture) is kept next to policy in a narrow, for operational
purposes unsuitable administrative framework. MAFRD is characterized by extremely top-heavy
management having been given opportunity (by central government) to establish a parallel
administration (6 ministerial advisers). This arrangement discourages regular middle management
and confuse staff. Also, in some instances, - mostly at the bottom of the hierarchy, - approved posts
are empty (that means the functions are there), but their resources are being used for financing
political posts at the top. In addition to these type of irregularities comes the fact that the creation of
KFVA takes considerable resources of the Plant and the Livestock Production Departments to the
point that their continued feasibility itself is in question.
The above mentioned issue of substantive focus just adds to the reform-need. The work of MAFRD
currently is supply-oriented, that means the emphasis is on what to produce, how to produce, and how
to promote production instead of concentrating ministry work on agricultural demand, on commodities,
product quality, agricultural markets and market regulation, and production incentive issues as all other
countries in Europe now do. This is to say, that if Kosovo wants to prepare for EU negotiations and
integration into the EU, the work of MAFRD needs reorientation and reorganization.
A special issue in MAFRD, but reportedly also in other ministries, is the top-heaviness of the
organization: two deputy ministers with supporting staff and several ministerial advisors, who time to
time interfere with the work of regular staff. On top, watchdogs have been instituted to control if
human rights are being respected, minorities and women treated adequately instead of placing the
resources into policy making in order to mastermind policies and programs that ensure that these
social strata become real beneficiaries of all programmes from the very outset.
The Kosovo Property Agency
The Property Agency is an establishment under the direct supervision of the Kosovo Government to
administer temporarily those private lands and buildings that – after all the political turbulences - are
subject to ownership disputes. There have been around 40.000 such cases of which the Agency has
succeeded to settle around half of them up to present.
Eventually most agricultural assets administered by the Property Agency will be transferred from the
state hand to their respective private owners. This requires continued legal drive and thoroughness to
solve the issues involved and correct commercial/financial management of the assets in the meantime.
MAFRD has no major role to play except monitoring the actual use of the agricultural assets during the
transition time.
10

The Kosovo Privatization Agency
The KPA (formerly Kosovo Trust Agency) was established to administer all socially and publicly owned
enterprises of Kosovo with the specific remit or endeavour to protect and enhance the value of their
assets. There are a number of agricultural or agriculture-related, - mainly agro-industrial - enterprises
among them.
The Agency is managed by a Board of Directors reporting to the Special Representative of the UN
Secretary General. A Special Chamber of Judges at the Supreme Court of Kosovo deals with
ownership and creditor claims against each of the enterprises and with any disputes arising out of
KTA‟s exercise of its functions. The Agency is also called to implement the liquidation procedures for
those socially owned enterprises that will be unable to meet their obligations and recover from financial
distress.
For the management of public and social property equivalent arrangements have been made in all
transition countries. As often considerable assets, agricultural or other, of the national economy are
managed in this form for considerable time period before privatization is accomplished, normally the
technical ministries concerned are part of the managing board. Kosovo follows the same praxis
obliging MAFRD to monitor developments and participate in the decision making required.
Agricultural education
At the university level up to the end of the 90-ies only livestock-, plant- and fruit production courses
existed at the Pristina Faculty of Agriculture. Since then new departments opened like plant protection,
veterinary medicine and agricultural economics, so that in general terms today it is possible to
graduate in agricultural sciences in Kosovo.
For secondary education in agriculture care the schools in Pristina, Ferizaj, Lipjan and Gjilan while
some other schools offer parallel subjects in agriculture. One can note, that the geographic distribution
of these schools in the country does not seem very balanced.
These institutions all are under the supervision of the Ministry of Education, so that MAFRD is more
customer than manager of agricultural education. Cooperation between the two ministries exists in
certain respects, yet it would seem desirable, that MAFRD contributes more, on a regular basis and
also in practical terms, to shaping the country‟s agricultural education.
The land cadastre
The cadastral service has recently been transferred from the Ministry of Public Administration to the
Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning. Its central office is in Pristina. Municipalities have each
their own cadastral office that report administratively to the respective municipality, technically to the
Central Cadastral Office in Pristina.
The quality of cadastral coverage leaves reportedly lot to be desired. This is obviously a great
handicap for agricultural development. Therefore, MAFRD, although directly not responsible, has a
major interest in cadastral improvement and should advocate, facilitate and lobby for cadastral
development programs.
3.3 Implications of the EU integration process
It would be good for the country, if the private sector could contribute to the preparation process by
establishing effective interest representations. It would be equally important, that the education sector
produces absolvent, who understand and welcome the integration prospects and process. It would be
further desirable, that the bulk of land ownership questions and dispute settlement advance and land
administration strengthen before negotiations come to a crucial stage. Whatever development takes
place, it looks now probable that MAFRD and KVFA (that now operates separately) will, after all,
practically alone, and without support, face EU‟s agricultural negotiators.
MAFRD now is no match for the EU Commission. It will have to start therefore gradually building up
those national institutions, that are supposed to collect and analyze the necessary information needed
for the negotiation.
11

From those institutions only a handful exist now in Kosovo. It will take long years to establish and
make them all function adequately. Annex-h contains a listing of the major institutions required with
some explanations and reference to the EU guide (over 100 pages!) describing these institutions in
detail.
3.4 The role of MAFRD
MAFRD has a key role to play, indeed. Its mandate now is relatively narrow, yet absolutely central.
What worries the Review Team most is that it seems as if MAFRD would not really find the method
and the tools yet for practically impacting on the agro-economy. This probably is consequence of its
low capability of policy analysis and policy making. The planned distribution of a yearly few millions in
agricultural/rural development subsidy won‟t reverse the apathy or the flow of resources decisively. It
helps though in counterbalancing the disadvantage of local products versus the imported products on
the domestic market, at least. In any case, MAFRD has to start moving the agro-economy by fiscal
instruments, for instance by more imaginative and more effective cooperation with the Ministry of
Finance and Economy.
MAFRD has to
reorient its work towards things that matter,
involve the entire Ministry in the EU preparatory activities,
progressively build up the structures (see annex-h!) required for the EU integration.
3.5 The capacity of MAFRD
MAFRD has more staff now than some Central- and Eastern European countries had when they
effectively started negotiations. Thus, the quantity of input is there. The question now is the quantity
and the quality of MAFRD‟s output.
The Review Team does not pretend to have examined in detail the various products of the different
departments or of the Ministry at large. It therefore can not pass judgment about the absolute value of
the performance. Relative values are, however, indicative.
The data collection has an enormous handicap, the absence of an agricultural census. Efforts are
made through GIS, MIS, FADN, however, the former two rather in a fragmented form. No data are
available, reportedly, about the most topics EU requires. The capacity of the Ministry to catch up in this
respect has to be rated as very limited.
The analytical capacity is restricted by definition: there is only one full time post in the Policy
Department and one post in the Forestry Department, that means two full time posts only for policy in
the entire Ministry. In addition, data necessary for analysis are difficult to obtain or not available at all.
Connected with the former point, strategy building and policy preparation ability is equally weak in the
Ministry and definitely not oriented towards economics. This dimension does not seem to be present in
the Ministry‟s work yet.
The public outreach of MAFRD can be rated best, if one considers the achievements of the rural
development advisory network although one has to consider, that part of the merit belongs to
municipalities and part to donors, who finance a supporting technical assistance project. But it should
be recognized, that the Ministry is geared to fieldwork. The same seems to apply to the forestry
administration through the Forestry Agency.
The management capability seems to be very uneven. Overall, however, MAFRD does not give the
impression of a well organized, effective institution. Its sectoral leadership qualities are questioned in
quite some quarters.
Apart from the – in Kosovar conditions - very difficult field of human resources administration the
administrative performance is notable, so that one is led automatically to the final conclusion, that the
Ministry does work as bureaucracy, however, achieves little substantively. For long it won‟t be able to
stand up to EU negotiation requirements.
12

4 The recommendations – the reform concept
4.1 The essence of the reform
MAFRD should:
I. reorient the focus of its work and reorganize itself accordingly;
MAFRD focuses its work at present on agricultural production while Europe
thinks in terms of agricultural commodities and markets. Whether inside or
outside the EU, Kosovo has now to redirect its attention and resources from
agricultural supply to demand, to market economics and to sustainability issues.
II. optimize resource utilization
a) by streamlining institutional structures and
b) by application of improved management methods;
base internal organization on functional lines and respect increasingly the
principles of good governance (rule of law, transparency, equity,
effectiveness/efficiency and accountability);
III. push, at government level, for reasonable civil service employment
conditions; at the same time start innovative recruitment and HR
management practices at MAFRD;
certain fundamental human resources and institutional policy issues, now impeding
effective functioning in MAFRD, can be solved only at government level; they
should be addressed by the Government soon. Some other measures regarding
recruitment and management of staff could be initiated immediately by MAFRD
itself.
In addition, MAFRD ought to enlarge its horizon to cover some issues that are currently not in its
purview but have an important effect on the sector‟s performance. Such are: agricultural education at
the secondary and tertiary level, land property records development, use and fate of agricultural assets
in the hands of the Kosovo Privatization Agency, establishment of producer associations, interest
representation of the processor industry, and lately and most importantly animal health, phytosanitary,
veterinary service and food safety policy, as these issues influence the conditions under which
MAFRD is called to develop the sector.
4.2 Specific suggestions for institutional change
A / For MAFRD consideration
Given the facts that
MAFRD‟s internal structure contradicts the classical organizational principles, that
many substantive issues badly need, but currently do not receive attention, that
the economic dimension seems to be absent from MAFRD‟s thinking, that
many staff are underutilized and many others, compared to the need, under qualified,
13

the use and management of human resources is deficient on Government level at large,
further
since ministries in most EU countries
focus on policy making and coordination, handle regulatory activities as well as support
functions separately, furthermore outsource service delivery,
delegate and decentralize their activities to the extent possible,
try to mobilize their human and other resources in rational/optimal way,
furthermore, as Kosovo decided to approximate the EU and therefore needs to
reprioritize and reorient its public activities accordingly towards the EU,
the following set of institutional reform measures is recommended in the agricultural and rural
development area:
A-1 Kosovo Agricultural Institute
The Institute
faces some operational difficulties regularly,
is professionally rather isolated and doubtlessly under-used,
has clearly service delivery (D) functions,
is at the same time also income generating, for what it needs more flexibility.
Therefore the Institute is to be moved to “MAFRD agency status”.
However, the Institute is
to conclude a cooperation - preferably also co financing - agreement with the University,
Faculty for Agriculture, for mutual benefit, so as to facilitate joint applied research on one
hand and internships of students on the other;
to enlarge private sector commercial services;
to integrate the Wine Institute;
to incorporate – at least temporarily - the Centre for Animal Breeding.
A-2 Kosovo Forestry Agency
The Agency
has double function: a) service deliverer of MAFRD and b) manager of public
Forests; seems adequately organized for both purposes
should welcome the decentralization of part of its current functions to municipalities
(transfer of forests guards), as proposed by the competent authorities
should take over the training and licensing responsibilities from MAFRD‟s Forestry
Department; these can be accommodated in the Agency‟s Forestry Management
Department.
A-3 Kosovo Food and Veterinary Agency
The heart of priority issues for EU (phytosanitary, veterinary, animal identification and food safety)
has been taken out of MAFRD early 2009 and placed under the direct supervision of the Prime
Ministers Office. Thus, the implementation of the necessary measures in these pivotal fields is not
anymore MAFRD responsibility although policy making in these fields remains with MAFRD.
The Agency‟s recent transfer to PMO is internationally highly unusual and questionable. It is likely
to overburden the PMO, it cripples MAFRD, causes further some coordination difficulties at policy
14

level as well as in international waters as neither the PMO nor the MAFRD mandate will be
compatible with international practice. There is one advantage, however: the most delicate matters
for the EU are now in one hand in Kosovo.
If the arrangement is maintained:
KFVA will have difficulties in respecting the limits of its mandate,
great coordination efforts with MAFRD will be needed; its board and
council are to be properly filled by a MAFRD representative and reciprocity
arrangements made,
international compatibility problems will have to be faced and appropriate
agreements for Kosovo‟s foreign representation made.
The Agency‟s organization chart is officially not yet approved. The draft has been examined by the
Review Team and found most logical. Also staffing plans seem appropriate. Whether KFVA will
receive sufficient supervision, remains a question.
In the given institutional situation MAFRD should
a) attentively follow events and evaluate the experience,
b) carefully perform its pertinent policy making mandate,
c) reorganize its affected central and regional offices appropriately.
The experience of separating KFVA from MAFRD ought to be reviewed in 2011.
In fact, if in Kosovo the PMO‟s direct attention is needed for matters, that condition EU
adhesion, the transfer of the entire MAFRD to the PMO might be considered given the
fact, that agriculture is really the only substantive area in the EU, that is handled entirely
at Community level implying that if a community legislation in agriculture is passed, all
member countries have to apply it automatically; it is not so in health, education, transport
or environment. Community legislation in agriculture does go over national legislation;
hence the great importance of agriculture in the negotiations and also in the community
budget.
Of course, the overloading of the PMO with agricultural/technical issues and the
disappearance of MAFRD as independent Ministry is not the logical solution to Kosovo‟s
agricultural and EU integration problems.
A-4 Substantive MAFRD departments (plant, livestock and forestry)
Considering, that
the plant and livestock departments lost feasibility due to KFVA‟s enlargement,
these departments are currently a mix of policy, coordination, regulation and service
delivery functions, and are therefore not without conflict of interest,
are not geared at all to dealing with commodities, markets, economics and EU
preparations,
work needs to be refocused and at least the regulatory function separated;
consequently the three substantive departments are to be dismantled; necessary functions to be
covered partly by new Policy Department, partly by the new Agricultural Production and Trade
Department, partly by the new Regulatory Department and in some respects delegated to the Forestry
Agency.
15

A-5 Rural Development Department
The old Rural Development Department should be slightly reorganized into three divisions covering
rural infrastructure,
rural services,
rural financing.
The first would be concerned with issues like land, irrigation, agro-environment,
markets- and financial services network, agro tourism.
Rural services would include the Advisory Service and would cover also human
resources development, leader initiatives, NGO activities, development of producer
associations as well as economic diversification efforts.
The rural financing division would monitor credit conditions, promote land as collateral
including for women and carry responsibility for progressive development of a reliable
and transparent subsidy distribution system. Moreover, it would actually arrange and
carry out the adjudication and payment of the yearly subsidies.
A-6 Legal Office
The Legal Department‟s
expertise covers at present three entirely different functions:
a) agricultural law formulation/harmonization,
b) monitoring/commenting on laws/amendments put forward by other
ministries and
c) support in administrative legal affairs;
function c) should be transferred to the Administrative Department (one officer);
function a) and b) should be grouped in a “Legal Office” reporting directly to the PS;
function a) agricultural law formulation/harmonization is definitely to be strengthened with
view to the urgent EU harmonization work.
A-7 Central Administration Department (CAD)
This department
should integrate the Procurement Unit,
strengthen its budget and finance section,
integrate a legal officer for litigation and other administration-related duties,
create an IT and EU centered training capacity (1 professional).
This department should furthermore
introduce and implement a more demanding recruitment policy (refer to point
G-2 below!) and
take up the HR management and development strategy issue at government
level (see point G-1 further down!).
A-8 Regulatory Department
This is a new department to be established to group three distinct divisions:
forestry and hunting inspectorate,
16

agricultural inspectorate covering land and plants, and
livestock and fisheries inspectorate.
The related regional activities are to be reorganized in view of increased work but reduced staff.
A-9 Policy Department
This department is
to be strengthened and organized in three divisions:
a) global and sectoral policy,
b) sub-sectoral policy (including food safety)
c) programs and evaluation.
The department is responsible for: policy analysis, policy formulation, strategy and programme
development, concept development for preparation and amendment of
national legislation and EU legal harmonization; position papers, reports, as well as the work plans of
the Ministry, development of action and technical assistance programms and their evaluation. Special
emphasis should be put on elaboration of economic solutions, fiscal measures, credit support
schemes, etc..
Working in multidisciplinary way the Department will cover plant-, livestock-, forestry production and
trade policy, rural development and agro-environmental policy, land/water use and sustainability,
agricultural education and research, gender-, minority- and rural social policy, national property use
and management policy, subsidy policy, food security and safety policy, human and animal health
standard measures, agro-industry development, definition of FADN, MIS, GIS and statistical
requirements;
The Department having sole responsibility for policy formulation, needs to closely cooperate - through
committee work, if necessary - with the technical departments (Commodities and Markets, Rural
Development and Regulatory) from where it receives the impetus and the required technical inputs.
A-10 Regional offices
The regional offices should
- receive from MAFRD supervision and support as a group,
- upon MAFRD agreement with KFVA receive instructions as to how to
cooperate with KFVA,
- receive amended job descriptions,
- receive increased mobility to increase their effectiveness,
- review and standardize their minimum linkage with municipalities.
The 5 regional offices will have 6 rural development advisers each for 5-7 municipalities
(and one for the minority), 5 land inspectors and 5 livestock inspectors; in total 16 officers.
While technically and operationally these officers will have to work with and report to the Rural
Development and the Regulatory Department respectively, the Regional Office as institution should
stand under the supervision of the (new) Coordination Office.
Given the relatively short distances in the country, in due course MAFRD might also consider the
closing down of its regional offices. (Not the ones of the Forestry Agency!) Operations could be
eventually run from headquarters in Pristina. This supposes, however, a more active and more official
link with the municipalities.
A-11 Municipalities
Municipal staff, both agricultural, rural development and inspections, - although varying in strength
according to local conditions, - represent a considerable force MAFRD should increasingly support and
17

use. Training offered by MAFRD programmes are found useful. They should be done in a planned way
so as to ensure, that also field officers are up to date on national and EU issues.
MAFRD should institute a focal point in the Coordination Office for municipal affairs and activities. It
should also require its Regional Offices, as long as they exist, to harmonize their activities with those
of the municipality offices.
The efficiency of most municipalities suffers from limitation on mobility. It will be hardly possible and
right for MAFRD to provide them vehicles. MAFRD might however consider, when its own interest
warrants it, finding some complementary solutions.
Sooner or later the question will arise, of course, whether it is sufficient for MAFRD to rely on advisers,
who are financed by other, independent source (municipalities), have therefore their own master, and
in consequence other priorities, other standards. The Ministry might need its own troop following the
same national command and national standards latest when it comes to advising farmers on subsidy
requests and yet another troop for physical control of subsidy distribution. The latter cannot do
anything with rural development advisers – whether municipal or central - as this would lead to conflict
of interests. It could be arranged, however, that either the municipality financed or (a later eventually)
centrally financed rural development advisory team (at least one person per municipality) supports
farmers in submission of their subsidy requests. These same advisers must not be used by the future
Paying Agency for the subsidy adjudication process.
A-12 Coordination & EU Office
Overall policy coordination is an important task that has not been addressed properly in MAFRD,
similar to other ministries. Sector departments develop their own policies and there is limited capacity
to analyze them with a multi-modal approach, transfer these policies into work plans and monitor on a
regular basis the implementation process. Furthermore, there is little or no capacity to coordinate
between different government planning documents (MTEF, EPAP etc.) and Ministry yearly work plans.
At the same time, there is an EU integration office, which is in charge of coordinating the European
integration issues as they relate to the MAFRD. This job mainly consists of working with the Agency for
Coordination, Development and European Integration (ACDEI) providing input and following the
implementation of the European Partnership Action Plan (EPAP). Considering that the EPAP and the
whole European agenda will continue to dominate the policy discourse in the future years, there is a
broad consensus among the FRIDOM team that the EU integration office scope could be
broadened to include general policy coordination issues as well. It should be noted that this
would not include technical level details of the policy initiatives (which could be coordinated by sector
departments)
The old Office for EU Integration is to be rearranged/upgraded
to coordinate with EU on all matters concerning MAFRD,
to coordinate multi- and bilateral, that is all international contacts, all donor contacts
including intermediation with prospective project-hosting departments
to assist in or lead negotiations regarding multi- and bilateral agreements; EU, CEFTA,
WTO, etc.
to manage communication campaigns in MAFRD‟s interest;
to mobilize departments in preparing material and documents for third parties;
to keep departments abreast of EU and other developments.
The task of this Office is not to try itself to provide all answers in case of EU queries, but to arrange
with the various competent substantive departments of MAFRD, that the appropriate answers be given
within the due deadline. This office mobilizes, coordinates and ensures timely delivery. This office will
report to the PS directly.
More details on the setup and operation of the office for Policy coordination and EU integration can be
found in the FRIDOM horizontal reviews dealing with Policy Planning and EU Integration processes.
18

A-13 Top management
As top management is by far too heavy related to MAFRD‟s technical staff and further, as the
existence of a circle of ministerial „political advisers‟ (parallel administration, a know government wide
problem) creates mistrust, overlaps, staff discouragement, confusion, and cost-inefficiency, it would be
advisable to streamline top management as follows:
retain only one deputy minister post (in charge of parliamentary relations),
retain in normal circumstances only one single ministerial advisory post (focusing, for
limited time, on new, specific issue(s) as long as decision has not been taken either to
drop the matter or to make it to regular duty of the ministry and thereby assigning the duty
to regular staff; in any case, the ministerial special adviser or advisers, if absolutely
unavoidable, should in no case mix into the regular ministry/departmental duties as that
would cause overlap and confusion);
keep the permanent secretary post apolitical,
the minister‟s office should consist of one chief of cabinet, one adviser, one Secretary, one
driver and one public relations/information officer only,
the Deputy minister has one secretary and one driver only,
the PS has one professional assistant and one secretary only,
there should be a two professionals Audit Office controlling expenditures ex-post,
reporting to the PS,
there should be one Certifying Officer controlling expenditures ex-ante, reporting to the
PS,
the Procurement Office is to be integrated into the Central Administration,
the Budget and Finance Office to be part of Central Administration,
the three current Human Right Posts are to be transferred to and integrated into the
Policy and Coordination Department along with the Gender issues position, since it is
more useful to provide for opportunities and facilities by effective policy measures in
advance than to inspect and control later when the damage has already occurred;
a new „Office‟ for Coordination, Communications & EU Affairs (5 professionals) is to be
established to report directly to the PS (see point A-12 above);
the „Legal Office‟ should also report to the PS (see point A-6 above);
subsidiary bodies (agency heads) should, for the time being, continue to report to the
Minister pending government-wide re-regulation of their status.
As these suggested reforms fall – as horizontal issues - partly into central government purview, refer
also to point G-3 further down!
A-14 The planned paying agency
For an EU paying agency it is too early in Kosovo. For a national paying agency based on EU
principles is never too early. It is costly, though. It
should be established, in due time, as one of the subordinate bodies of
19

MAFRD, see also G-5 !; it would be , however, wiser to start up first a
manual version, progressively in the rural development division; for the year
2009 nothing else would be feasible anyhow, a division within the Rural
Development Department has been created in the proposed organigram for this
purpose;
a first concept for the EU-type paying agency has been transmitted by the
Review Team to MAFRD top management mid June upon special request (see
annex – i),
it was also suggested to MAFRD to start up a farm registry simultaneously with the
idea, that only those farmers should receive subsidy, who get registered and
become thus known entities facilitating contact and control.
A-15 Land consolidation programme
Land fragmentation and ownership issues being a main concern in the country, MAFRD reportedly
considers starting up a land consolidation programme and possibly creating an institution (as MAFRD
subsidiary agency) for this purpose. While the motive is fully understandable in the Kosovar
circumstances, - the land consolidation issue is indeed among the top priorities, - the envisaged
solution is more than questionable based on the international experience. Solutions should be
envisaged preferably on the policy level: a) one should create incentives for the farmers to start
consolidation (certain type of tax holidays for instance for exemption from land transfer , subsidies e.g.
for paying for assistance of lawyers and geometers), b) one should simplify administrative procedures
for sale, purchase, exchange of land) particularly in the cadastre office. One should, in addition, c)
train some lawyers and lands surveyors so as to be ready for such jobs in the Kosovar context and
finally d) MAFRD, when ready, should make some propaganda through the mass media and the rural
development service for this operation. This can be done without additional institutions. Therefore the
creation of a land consolidation agency is outright discouraged. If only the interest of farmers is raised
and the administrative obstacles pushed away, the program will work. No need for bureaucracy.
At the same time MAFRD is urged to encourage at inter ministerial level the speeding up of
improvement of land ownership records and to administratively facilitate land exchange.
Similar approach is suggested for the irrigation issue. Create interest in the private sector, mobilizes it
and minimize the bureaucratic obstacles.
A-16 Agricultural Production and Trade Department
The old Plant, Livestock and Forestry Departments pass their policy functions to the enlarged Policy
Department, pass their inspection function to the new Regulatory Department and what remains, -
mainly monitoring and implementation functions, - (that normally would be delegated to an
implementing agency, like the KFA, but in lack of resources in Kosovo at this stage such a proposal –
regarding the establishment of a KAA (Kosovo Agriculture Agency), would not be realistic), will be
grouped into an Agricultural Production and Trade Department. However, this new department should
not just group old monitoring and implementation functions. It should, rather, concentrate on global,
European and domestic markets, prices, quantities, qualities, trade transactions and market
regulations. It should handle the necessary licensing and manage data collection required for
economic analysis. Within this department a division of responsibilities according to the traditional
disciplines (plant, livestock, forestry) is possible.
In sum:
The organizational chart reflecting the above institutional structure is shown here below.
For the more detailed mandates of the new or streamlined individual organizational units reference is
made to annex g.
Please note, that the overriding principle of the suggested reorganization is an emphasized
output orientation. The Ministry should be structured so as to easily produce the strategy
documents, information data and reports it needs for its governmental work and the EU
20

integration. At this junction MAFRD does not need forestry or livestock specialists, who
eventually do policy or inspection, and mix at the same time into service delivery.
MAFRD now needs full-blood policy makers to prepare multidisciplinary, economically sound
and coherent policy position papers. MAFRD needs full-fledged inspectors, specialized
commodity experts, etc. (who, of course, must have forestry or agronomy or trade or whatever
other professional background as fundament), but who understand the different approach,
excel in team work, and are able to focus on the changed priorities in order to deliver special,
EU-type intellectual products.
Consequently, MAFRD should not be organized any more along the lines of traditional schooldisciplines
(that is plant, livestock, forestry and more recently the interdisciplinary rural
development), but according to the type of function (policy making, coordination, regulation,
service delivery and support) required for MAFRD’s best performance.
Tab. Summary and sequencing of proposed changes
Recommendation / Implementation period
General recommendations
1. Reorient the focus of its work and reorganize
itself accordingly;
2. Optimize resource utilization
a) by streamlining institutional structures and
b) by application of improved management
methods;
3. Push, at government level, for reasonable civil
service employment conditions; at the same time
start innovative recruitment and HR
management practices at MAFRD;
4. Reprioritize and reorient its public activities
accordingly towards the EU
Specific recommendations
1. Kosovo Institute for Agriculture (Peja) is to be
moved to “MAFRD agency status”.
2. Decentralize part of its current functions to
municipalities (transfer of forests guards), as
proposed by the competent authorities
3. The experience of separating KFVA from
MAFRD ought to be reviewed in 2011
4. The three substantive departments (plant
production, livestock, forestry) are to be
dismantled; necessary functions to be covered
partly by new Policy Department, partly by the
new Agricultural Production and Trade
Department, partly by the new Regulatory
Department and in some respects delegated to
the Forestry Agency.
5. The old Rural Development Department
X
should be slightly reorganized into three
divisions covering
- rural infrastructure,
X
- rural services,
- rural financing
6. Strengthen Legal Office reporting directly to
PS and transfer one legal officer to X
X
X
X
X
X
21
Within 1
year
Short-term
(1-2 years)
X
X
Medium-term (3-5
years)

Administrative Department
7. Central Administrative Department
- should integrate the Procurement Unit,
- strengthen its budget and finance section,
- integrate a legal officer for litigation and other
administration-related duties,
- create an IT and EU centered training
capacity (1 professional).
8. Establish new Regulatory Department
- forestry and hunting inspectorate,
- agricultural inspectorate covering land and
plants, and
- livestock and fisheries inspectorate.
9. Policy Department to be strengthened and
organized in three divisions:
a) global and sectoral policy,
b) sub-sectoral policy (including food safety)
c) programs and evaluation.
10. Regional offices should receive from MAFRD
supervision and support as a group,
11. Municipality field officers should be updated
on national and EU issues.
12. Office for Coordination and EU Integration is
to be rearranged/upgraded
X
13. Streamline top management X
14. Establish planned „Paying Agency‟ X
15. Land Consolidation solutions should be
envisaged preferably on the policy level
16. Establish new Agricultural Production and
Trade Department - concentrated on global,
X
European and domestic markets, prices, X
quantities, qualities, trade transactions and
market regulations
Impact on gender issues
Recommendations provided in the report are of a structural and technical nature, and therefore don‟t
affect the gender balance and/or minorities directly. We do not expect that the implementation of
changes will have any significant impact on the current gender and minority balance if we take the
ministry and subordinated entities together.
For different reasons all over Europe technical disciplines are more studied by men, and such a
”technical” ministry as the MAFRD will never be able to ensure exact balance between genders. It
cannot be predicted today, but we can assume that the tendency will remain also during the
recruitment process for the new posts, which are mainly recommended for the sector departments and
require technical knowledge and educational background. At the same time we do not find any of the
recommendations to be in any way discriminatory, if implemented properly, and we consider them
gender and minority neutral.
X
X
X
X
22
X

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
T
e
c s
h t
n a
i ff
c
a
l
Policy Department
#
Total Staff
Coordination & EU
Office
#
(3)
Global & sector
policies
(4)
Sub-Sectoral
policies
(4)
Program
development &
evaluation
(2)
- top management 15
- coordination & legal 16
- policy department 12
- Ag. Prod. & Trade Dept. 13
- rural development 20
- regulatory 18
- administration 23
117
Deputy Minister –
(parlamentary relations)
(1)
DM‟s Office
(2) b
Internal Audit
(2)
Agricultural Production
& Trade Department
#
Ag Production &
Trade
(4)
Licensing
(2**)
Data Division
(FADN, GIS, MIS)
(5)
Kosovo Forestry Agency
23
Minister
(1)
Permanent Secretary
(1)
Rural Development
Department
#
Rural
Infrastructure
(4)
Rural services
(AS)
(4) +(6 *)
Subsidy Unit (PA)
(4)
Kosovo Institute for Agriculture
Minister‟s cabinet
(5) a
PS Office
(3) c
Legal Office
#
(9)
Regulatory Department
#
Forestry & hunting
Inspectorate
(6)
Agricultural
Inspectorate
(5)
Livestock &
Fisheries
Inspectorate
(5)
MAFRD Organigram
FRIDOM proposal
2009
Administration Department
#
Budget & Finance
& Procurement
(5+2)
HR & IT &
Litigation Division
(3 + 1 +1)
Logistics &
Translation
(3 +3)
Archive
(3)
( ) Number of proposed staff
a 1 Chief of Cabinet + 1 Adviser + 1 Secretary + 1 Driver + 1 Public Relation/Info Officer (5)
b 1 Assistant + 1 Driver (2)
c 1 Assistant + 1 Secretary + 1 Certifier (3)
# 1 Director + 1 Secretary (2)
* 6 RD Advisers outposted to regions (6)
** 1 Agriculture licensing & certification + 1 Livestock licensing & certification

B/ For Government consideration
For the benefit of all ministries the Government should consider to:
G-1 establish civil service employment system, in which there is provision
- for employment categories/job-classification and corresponding
adequate remuneration,
- for recognition of timely seniority, that is yearly small (step-) increase
in salaries,
- for recognition in professional seniority, that is additional pay for
superior level of responsibility (even if temporary),
- for regular performance review and promotion scheme,
- for HR development framework and training;
G-2 amend the recruitment system to make mandatory the following
application/recruitment conditions for all professional level of employees:
> public competition (with written examination),
> graduate plus post-graduate degree relevant for the position,
> proven proficiency in one of the EU official languages,
> minimum three months of professional working experience in one of
the EU member countries,
> two years of relevant working experience in Kosovo,
> good references from at least two professional supervisors
> certified proficiency in IT use.
G-3 reconsider and systematize rules for Kosovan public administration structures
and procedures regarding issues as listed hereunder:
- role of Prime Minister‟s Office and number of units attached to it,
(the PMO is currently overloaded),
- function of ministries and their subsidiary bodies, distinction in their
respective mandates, (ministries should focus on policy and
coordination and delegate/decentralize regulatory and service delivery
functions, whenever possible),
- number of deputy ministers admissible (there should be preferably
only one, and that one responsible for parliamentary affairs, with one
professional assistant);
- number of ministerial advisers (to be limited to one, on contractual
basis only for currently acute, special issues),
- the units reporting directly to a minister: his own office (one
professional assistant and one secretary), his Deputy, his Adviser, and
the Information/Public Relations Office (two professionals) only,
- number of permissible hierarchical levels within ministries,
- minimum and maximum number of officers for organizational units,
- size, place and scope of work of human right posts (to be integrated
into sectoral policy departments),
- confirmation that all other units including the audit and sub-ordinate
bodies report to the, apolitical, Permanent Secretary, who, of course,
reports to the Minister,
- integration of procurement and the finance/budget unit into central
Administration,
- recommended composition of the PS‟ Office including the
expenditure Certifying Officer.
G-4 The establishment of a so-called “paying agency” – now reportedly on the
agenda of MAFRD management, - is obligatory for EU member
countries who handle EU agricultural and rural development funds. It is not
obligatory for candidates and applicants, however some establish it in
advance, in order to show their readiness for EU standards and in any case
demonstrate their efforts towards orderly administration of public resources.
24

Following the EU praxis the Kosovan Government should, when time comes,
appoint the Ministry of Finance as “Authorizing/Accrediting Body” and
MAFRD as “Supervising Body”. The Ministry of Finance should, in turn,
select a “Certifying/Auditing Body”, while MAFRD, as Supervising Body will
establish the future Paying Agency as its operationally autonomous sub-
ordinate agency (a status just like the Forestry Agency now). (In fact, the
paying agency will not handle money; it will delegate that function to the state
treasury. It will however decide, on the basis of respective future laws, as to
who is entitled to subsidy, account for it and control the use of the subsidies).
To start with, it would be wiser to establish first a small unit in the new
MAFRD Rural Development Department to handle subsidies. Resources could
be saved and some useful experience gained for the future paying agency. See
annex - i for details!
5. The recommendations – the implementation strategy
5.1 The basic approach
The Ministry now needs a reconsolidation period to achieve two things:
first, to learn the new substantive approach, to elaborate and to respect the new
job divisions and to master the new mandate on one hand, and
secondly, to improve staff capacity/quality, on the other hand, by trying out and,
systematically training staff as well as replacing staff unable to develop.
No additional posts should be created (except the ones specified above) and no new staff hired unless
for replacing someone leaving.
Only after this consolidation period should MAFRD proceed to enlargement or to establishment of
additional subordinate bodies, otherwise MAFRD will be unable to digest changes or make use of
them.
The MAFRD reform has two main chapters: 1) reorientation and 2) reorganization.
The reorientation, too, has reorganization implications, but they should be integrated in the
reorganization chapter.
5.2 Reorientation of the work programme and of staff capacity
Reorientation is a process. Basic understanding of issues involved has to be achieved across the
entire managerial and technical/professional ministry staff. This can only happen through guided
individual learning with information available mostly on the web, seminars organized for the purpose,
working group sessions, visits of foreign specialists in MAFRD and study tours of MAFRD officials
abroad. An appropriate EU twinning arrangement could contribute most.
Knowledge about certain subjects like the Copenhagen criteria, EU acquis, common agricultural policy
(CAP), administrative institutions needed for implementing the acquis, the EU subsidy system, the
negotiation process and accessibility of various types of EU information and data bases like EUR-LEX,
CELEX, EUROSTAT, etc. should be acquired by all professionals.
In a second effort, each professional ought to deepen his/her knowledge in his/her own subject fields,
e.g. commodities or rural development financing, by studying programme documents, reports,
agreements, legislative pieces of the EU.
It cannot be emphasized enough, how much the proficiency in one of the European languages would
facilitate this task.
25

To ensure, that staff effectively absorbs knowledge about the EU and retains a minimum necessary to
face EU visitors, to find the access to professional information and to prepare adequately for
negotiations, an obligatory written exam should be introduced for all staff (except the political
appointees). A general level of EU-related knowledge should be required and staff, who do not reach
that minimum, be forced out of the Ministry.
5.3 Reorganization of structures
The reorganization will affect ministry staff in different ways. For certain posts there won‟t be change at
all, for instance for the internal auditors and for many in the support department. For others the job will
not change, only the reporting relations e.g. the Information Officer; the FADN Officer and the Regional
Officers. For yet others, and in fact for the majority of substantive officers, both the job content plus the
organizational setting will be new. The big task is to arrange this transition without interrupting the
Ministry‟s normal performance.
The first step is to appoint a 3-men Transition Management Committee (TMC) of which the Head of
Administration has to be one member.
The second step is for top management to select and entrust future permanent or preliminary
office/department heads, who will study and further elaborate the department‟s mandate.
The third step is for heads for offices/departments to organize the department‟s work based on the
mandate and decide about division of responsibilities i.e. individual job descriptions.
The fourth step is to prepare a complete staffing list showing the staff‟s key qualifications as there will
be abolished posts and new posts and the available staff has to be matched with the available posts.
The fifth step is to require every single officer of all positions to prepare a list of a) all jobs that are part
of their regular duties, b) list all now outstanding jobs and c) list all jobs expectable in the next three
months. This is necessary, because current job descriptions are incomplete or not detailed enough. (2
weeks to complete and to deposit with the TMC)
The sixth step is to prepare the list of posts for which there is an obvious incumbent. For instance a
licensing specialist, who will have to move from the old Plant Production Department to the new
Regulatory Department. If there are several candidates, the most suitable should get the posts.
The seventh step is to prepare the list of those posts for which there are no obvious candidates. Here
the remainder of candidates has to be matched with the remainder of posts considering well the
potentials of the candidates and the requirements of the posts.
The eighth step is to draw up the list of posts filled with staff whose qualifications is not really up to the
requirements of the new job and start planning for them a complementary education cum training
scheme.
The ninth step is to provide staff with their respective new job descriptions, which they themselves will
have to complete, amend, correct and review for 3 months before they get reviewed by the respective
department head and the HR division prior final approval and officialisation. In preparation of this also
a departmental job-harmonization meeting should take place, where job divisions and mutual
competences get discussed and sorted out. At the same time the department head should review and
finalize the departmental mandate.
The tenth step brings department heads together under the chairmanship of the PS (or, if he so
wishes, the Minister) to review the mandate of the entire ministry and to ensure, that all duties are
adequately covered. There should be no gaps and no overlaps left, and a general understanding
achieved as to how the ministry works.
The eleventh step is a general staff meeting under the chairmanship of the minister, who announces
the changes and the date, when they take effect. He gives two weeks for everyone to hand over old
duties to the new responsible person.
26

Twelfth step: the respective department heads review with each staff member the list of outstanding
work and agree on a schedule for its completion.
The thirteenth step is a meeting of the PS with the department heads reviewing the situation and
taking stock of the problems still to be resolved: posts not filled, persons unplaceable, task deadlines
difficult to keep and the solutions envisaged for these cases.
Depending on the type of civil service system the government will introduce at large, the HR Division
later on will have to proceed to job classification, so as to allow human resources management and
development planning in and for the Ministry.
5.4 The time schedule
From the date the Government has approved this public administration reform concept for MAFRD,
preparations for execution of the reform should take 4 weeks and the actual transition described above
in 13 steps, 12 weeks. The reform as described above should be prepared gradually, but take effect
for the whole Ministry on the same date.
The above is to say, that the structural reform itself can be achieved in a matter of 6 months, that
means on short-term, easily. What takes longer, - say mid-term, - is the intellectual reorientation of
ministry staff and their acquiring the professional skills for demand-and sustainability oriented
performance on one hand, and the adjustment of employment conditions and thereby slow upgrading
of staff quality on the longer term, on the other hand.
5.5 Resource requirements
In principle no new professional and general service staff will be required as the new ministry will
actually save a few posts. Some staff would become superfluous, but counting the vacancies created
by the reorganization, that might not cause big problems.
Of course, the suitability and quality of staff is another matter. Yearlong efforts will be needed to bring
the personnel up to level. MAFRD will have to invest into training and foreign expertise in order to
upgrade and to fully mobilize staff capacity. A carefully selected twinning partner could play a key role
in this endeavour..
27

The tasks of the consultant
28
Annex – a
“The Consultant will undertake a functional review of the MAFRD of Kosovo. Such review shall cover:
- overall institutional framework for managing agricultural, forestry and rural
development issues in Kosovo with particular focus on allocation of functions to
different bodies and their overlaps;
- implications of EU integration process on institutional and functional structure of
agricultural, forestry and rural development governance systems used in Kosovo;
- role of MAFRD and its functional and organizational structure.
- capacity of MAFRD to implement its mandated functions.
Based on the findings of the review the Consultant should suggest the most appropriate institutional
framework for managing agricultural, forestry and rural development policies in
Kosovo as well as propose a corresponding strategy for organizational change of the MAFRD covering
its functions, organizational structure and capacity. Such strategy should include short and medium
term recommendations sufficient for advancing Ministry‟s administrative capacity in line with Kosovo‟s
European integration objectives.”
(Quoted from the consultant‟s contract)

The working schedule of the Review
May 10 - 16, 2009
- start-up consultation with the FRIDOM Team
- introductory visits to MAFRD, agreement on work plan
- review of basic documents
- first interviews
May 31 - June 17, 2009
- further interviews in Pristina and the field
- completion of diagnostic phase
- elaboration of the reform concept
June 28 - July 10, 2009
- meeting with the MAFRD Reform Committee
- elaboration of reform implementation strategy
- preparation of the presentation
- presentation of draft findings and recommendations
July 27 - July 31, 2009
- receipt of MAFRD comments on the presentation
- formulation of the draft final report
August 01 – August .., 2009
- translation and transmission of the draft final report to MAFRD
October 11 – 16, 2009
- discussing department comments with department heads
- briefing the new institution building twinning team
- preparation of the second presentation
- second presentation (October 16)
- receipt of final MAFRD comments
- preparation of the final report
- delivery of the final report
29
Annex – b

List of meetings
Name & Surname Position
Shefki Zeqiri Acting Permanent Secretary (Head of Legal
Fellanza Balaj
Department)
Head of Central Administration Department (Liaison
Officer for MAFRD)
Shqipe Dema
Head of Policy & Statistics Department
Faton Osmani Head of EU Integration
Ross Bull ISMAFRD Project – EC funded
Walter De Oliveira LDS Project – EC funded
Qaush Kabashi Head of Kosovo Food & Veterinary Agency – KFVA
Muzafer Luma Head of Kosovo Forestry Agency – KFA
Xhevat Lushi Adviser to Minister
Frymezim Isufaj Adviser to Minister
Hysen Abazi Head of Forestry Department
Ismet Kastrati Acting Director of Kosovo Institute for Agriculture – KIA
Shaban Dreshaj Head of Rural Development & Advisory Services
Isuf Cikaci Head of Department for Plant Production & Protection –
DPP
Nesim Morina Director of Wine Institute
Bajram Imeri Head of Livestock Department
Isuf Mahmutaj Head of Budgeting Unit
Teuta Kryeziu Head of Procurement Unit
Menderes Ibra Ex-permanent secretary of MAFRD
Radmila Simeunovic Director of Agriculture Department – Lipjan
Njazi Ibrahimi Rural advisor – Lipjan
Avdi Llolluni Regional office – Peja
Imer Peci & Ajete Sadrijaj Phytosanitary Inspectors – Peja regional office
Hivzija Beskovic Apple farmer – Blagaje, Peja
Skender Ramadani Greenhouse farmer, Godanc, Shtime
Elheme Hetemi Member of agriculture parliamentary group
Xhevat Azemi Deputy Director of Kosovo Property Agency
Iva Stamenova ECLO Task Manager
Artan Osmani ECLO Local Task Manager
Nusrete Doda DTL ISMAFRD
Basri Hyseni FADN expert ISMAFRD
Bekim Hoxha Assistant to PS
Merita Musa Rural advisor – Prishtina municipality
Ramiz Ramadani Rural advisor – Gjilan municipality
Fadile Demelezi Rural advisor – Viti municipality
Kimete Jahiu Regional officer – Gjilan
30
Annex - c

Reference Material
31
Annex - d
o Guide to the main administration structures required for implementing the acquis,
o CEC, 2005
o The Kosovo Greenbook, 2003
Agricultural Rural Development Plan (ARDP) 2007 – 2013, 2006
The whole-of-government review, FRIDOM, 2008
Kosovo Development Strategy and Plan, 2006
o Regulation Database for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development
Medium Term Expenditure Review, 2008 – 2010 (2008), 2009 – 2011 (2009)
Organigram of MAFRD, 2006
MAFRD Budget review, WB, 2007
Technical Group on Agriculture and Rural Development, 2006
MAFRD job descriptions, 2006
Six country review (Slovenia, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland, Estonia, Slovakia) GAP
census, 2007
Kosovo Food Law, February 2009, Kosovo Parliament

Annex – e: The logic and workflow of functional analysis
Methodology
Development
Agreed
Methodology
Data
Collection
Databases
Analysis of
Functions
Options for
Restructuring
Categories and
Characteristics of
functions
32
Legend:
Resource
Analysis
Best Organizational
Solutions
Related Output
Procedural
Step
Design Plan of
Implementation
Reform
Recommendations

Organizational Structure of MAFRD
2007
Forestry Institute
Policy Development
Dept.
#
Policy Development Unit
(3)
Agricultural Statistics
Office
(7)
Kosovo Forestry
Agency (KFA)
Kosovo Food and
Veterinary agency
(KFVA)
# Drirector & Assistant
Dept. of Plant
Production and
Protection
#
Seed Sector
(3)
Phytosanitary Inspection
(10)
Horticulture Section
(4)
Irrigation Sector
(3)
Sekretary for
Pesticide and
Administration
(1)
Deputy
Minister
Policy Advisor (1)
Shef i zyres se SP
(1)
Asistent i larte I
SP
(1)
Dept. of RD and
Advisory Services
#
RD Division
(4)
Advisory Services
Division
(4)
Land Protection
Division
(1)
Minister
Policy Advisors
(5)
Permanent Secretary
Dept. of Livestock
Production
#
Breeding, Production
and Marketing Sector
(2)
Animal feed and
Pasture Management
Sector
(1)
Poultry, Fishery, Bees
and Livestock
Inspection sector
(8)
Center for Livestock
Breeding
(5)
33
Legal and Public Relation
Department
Director of LOPR (1)
Procurement Department (2)
Information, Relations Office (2)
Office for EU Integration (1)
Revision Unit (1)
Forestry
Deptartment
#
Sector for training &
Advise
(3)
Sector for Forestry
Policy
Development
(1)
Sector for wild
animal policies,
management &
Ecotourism
(1)
Sector for
Inspection &
Control
(6)
Annex – f: Current organigram of MAFRD
Legal Assistant (1)
Legal Officer (5)
Human Rights Unit (3)
Dept. of Central
Administration
#
Budget & finance
Sector
(4)
HRD Sector
(2)
Organization,
Infrastructure &
Logistics
(4)
Civil employees of
Minister
(2)
Kosovo Institute
for Agriculture
(Peja)
Director of Institute

The mandate of the new or adjusted organizational units
01 The Deputy Minister
reporting to: Minister
in charge of : parliamentary relations
duties: -ensures that the Parliament receives MAFRD position on legislative drafts
originating in other ministries,
- prepares the ground for MAFRD legislative action, facilitates the
examination and adoption of MAFRD legal drafts and amendments,
lobbies for the agricultural sector,
- represents the Minister, when required
02 The Coordination & EU Office
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : international, inter institutional and departmental coordination
34
Annex – g
duties: acting as focal point for bilateral, multilateral and above all for EU activities
-organizing visits, meetings, negotiations, exchange of official
-information; ensuring, that MAFRD delivers and receives, what is due
-assisting the PS in mobilizing departments regarding
-substantive preparations and inputs required for MAFRD‟s bi-and -multilateral and EU
contacts,
-designing, producing and disseminating communication material of interest MAFRD
for national and international use;
-maintaining privileged liaison with the governmental EU focal point, so as tobe in
position to prepare in advance inputs required;
-focal point for donor contacts (all bilateral and multilateral) upto start of
work on preparation of program/project documents
supervising the MAFRD regional offices,
coordinating the relationship between MAFRD and the municipalities
03 The Legal Office
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : interpretation and preparation of legislative acts
duties: -development of legislative policies and strategies
-development of primary and secondary legislation in MAFRD‟s purview
-commenting, from MAFRD‟ point of view, all legislation of primary
concern to and originating from other ministries
ensuring compatibility of legislation and sub legal acts with the EU acquis
communautaire
-providing legal advise and opinion required by MAFRD and Government
-representing MAFRD in disputes and at Court
-ensuring accomplishment of legal tasks for implementation of the legislation
and other legal provisions in the scope of MAFRD
-cooperation with other institutions at the central and local level to create legal
infrastructure in the scope of activity of MAFRD
-drafting decisions, contracts, memoranda of understanding, replying to queries and
correspondence

Organization - two divisions:
- division for development and approximation of legislation
- division for supervision of implementation and inter institutional cooperation
04 The Public Relations/Information Officer
reporting to: Minister
in charge of : info collection and dissemination (according requests)
duties: - collecting media information for the Minister
- providing information to the public upon instruction in name of the Minister
- preparing public information material
- up keeping the web-page of the Ministry
05 Policy Department
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : preparation of all sectoral and sub-sectoral policies, strategies, programs and
reports, including evaluations for MAFRD in due cooperation with the
substantive departments concerned
duties: - definition of the type of production, processing, trade, consumption, input,
infrastructure, financing and other data the profession needs for proper
analysis and policy making, (for the guidance of agricultural statistics,
FADN, MIS, GIS etc.)
- analysis of all relevant national and international agricultural development
trends and measures, whereby agriculture includes – following to the FAO
definition – also forestry‟s, fisheries, first grade of agro-processing, the
required input supply, financing, food security and food safety, agro-
environment and rural development,
- elaboration of appropriate sectoral policy concepts, preparation of short-,
medium- and long term strategies and programmes,
- evaluation of past performance, preparation of reports and position papers,
- preparation of concepts for national legislation or its amendment,
- EU harmonization of legislation in cooperation with the Legal Office,
- design of agro-economic measures such as fiscal measures, credit support
schemes
- design and orchestration of specific studies into plant-, livestock-, forestry
production and agro-trade branches and sub-branches in cooperation with the
Commodities and Markets Department, - into rural development and the state
of agro-environment, land/water use and sustainability, agricultural education
and research, gender-, minority- and rural social policy, in cooperation with
the Rural Development Department, - national property use and management
policy effects, subsidy policy, food security and safety policy, human and
animal health standard measures and agro-industry followed by elaboration of
sub-sectoral and branch strategies and programs;
- preparation of MAFRD‟s yearly and multi annual programs, as appropriate
and the related performance reports and evaluations necessary;
- formulation of the sectoral viewpoint regarding all global economic and
social issues and concerning programs and policies of other sectors
organization: - three divisions:
- global and sectoral policies
- sub-sectoral policies (food, agriculture, forestry, rural development)
- program development and evaluation
35

06 Agricultural Production and Markets Department
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : data generation, resource development and market monitoring
duties: -monitoring of international and national commodity markets, MIS
supervision, prices and market regulations
-farm-gate prices, margins, incomes, supervision of FADN
-plant production, protection, livestock development, feed, sylviculture and
forestry protection, hunting, fisheries, beekeeping
-agro-processing development
-input supply monitoring
-licensing, certificates and permissions
organization: -in three divisions:
-agricultural products/market monitoring
-resources protection and development
-input monitoring and promotion
07 Rural Development Department
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : rural development monitoring and measures
duties: -roads, energy, communications, water supply, health and educational facilities
storage, transport and marketplaces, communal services monitoring, analysis
and facilitation of development,
-promotion, support and coordination of rural advisory services,
-development and dissemination of agricultural/rural educational and
information material,
-promotion of gender issues,
-coordination of the activities of MAFRD regional offices, coordination with
municipal programs,
-support to rural human resources development and employment
creation/diversification programes,
-promotion of association and cooperation of producers and processors,
-monitoring and facilitation of rural financing,
-administration of the MAFRD subsidy programs,
-running of the farm registry scheme in due course organization: three divisions:
-rural infrastructure
-rural organizations
-rural finance/subsidies
08 Regulation Department
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of: inspections
duties: -planning, execution and reporting on regular and ad-hoc inspections
in the field of land, forest, eco-activities, hunting, fishing, livestock and
plants, seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, input dealers, seedling producers, organic
productions, feed, agro-environment, etc. ensuring due respect of regulations,
-taking knowledge of EU norms and standards, developing familiarity with EU
requirements and controlling practice; progressive harmonization
36

organization: -three divisions
>agricultural inspectorate
>forestry and hunting inspectorate
>livestock and fisheries inspectorate
09 Administrative Department
reporting to: Permanent Secretary
in charge of : administrative support to MAFRD substantive departments and management
duties: -preparation and execution of the budget with connected planning,
procurement, payments, accounting and internal control;
-human resources planning, recruitment/administration, legal services,
training and IT support, (this latter to focus on EU-related requirements)
-logistics service, translation/interpretation service and archives
organization: three divisions:-finance
-human resources
-logistics and records
37

A/ The main structures
THE MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES REQUIRED
BY THE EU ACQUIS COMMUNAUTAIRE
The EU legislation requires from ist member countries the following main functions/institutions:
38
Annex - h
1) a Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development
responsible for free movement of agricultural commodities and services on the domestic and EU
markets and for implementation of the EU rural development, fishery and forestry policies;
2) State Veterinary Office with Animal Identification Agency
usually a sub-ordinate body of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development;
3) State Plant Health Protection Administration
usually a subordinate institution of the Ministry;
4) State Food Safety Agency
Mostly part or sub-ordinate agency of the Ministry;
5) Paying Agency
for handling a) CAP expenditures and market interventions both on the domestic market and the
activities related to the external regime (import and export) including application of rules of the
Community Customs Code and b) rural development support; mostly a subordinate body;
6) Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS)
a computerized data base system for integrated controlling of land, animal and other resources in
cooperation with the Geodetic Institutes, the Animal Identification Agency and the Agribusiness
Register to monitor data compatibility; usually linked with the Paying Agency;
7) Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) and a National Committee
to monitor the agricultural income situation respectively to select and monitor the reporting farms;
established often outside of the Ministry; its data are reported to the EU Commission;
8) Market Information System (MIS)
monitoring of staple food, fruits, vegetables i.e. consumer prices; run most often than not as semiprivate
or private institution;
9) Monitoring Committee for rural development measures
to ensure effectiveness, equity and transparency;
10) Farm Register
to register all those who receive subsidies;
11) Agribusiness Register
to register all agribusiness companies
12) Institute for Standards, Metrology and Intellectual Property
13) Market Surveillance Agency
14) State Aid Monitoring Authority
Agencies 12-14 are normally not under the surveillance of the Ministry of Agriculture.

B/ Specific structures for EU market organizations
In addition to the above listed main institutions specific structures are required for the administration of
EU market organizations. The chief ones among others are:
a) Market Intervention Agencies
for provision and/or withdrawal of produce in a number of sectors following specified rules which are
laid down in the relevant EU regulations for regular market and price monitoring, buying-in, public
storage, sales and stock control in premises approved to EU standards, operation of a control system
on the use and destination of intervention products and other sector-specific tasks;
b) Producer organizations i.e. for fruits and vegetables with intervention powers;
c) Approved distilleries for the wine sector;
d) Registers for olive oil and vineyards;
e) Control agency for olive oil.
C/ Non-specified administrative structures
Whenever EU regulations do not specify exactly the administrative structures, it is left to the competent
authority, mostly the Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development, to decide, which institution be
responsible for the effective implementation of the acquis. The key functions are:
aa) Common Market Organization mechanisms governing trade with third countries such as
management of export refunds and export taxes, import and export licenses, tariff quota management,
operation of a control system on exports and application of the rules of the Community Customs Code,
bb) statistical requirements,
cc) effective implementation of the Community legislation on organic farming,
dd) implementation of Community legislation on quality policy.
D/ Administrative structures in cooperation with the private sector
Such institutions are:
i) operation of the EU supply management instruments such as quotas for sugar, dairy and
starch sectors,
ii) carcass classification and price sector for livestock,
iii) specific rules for ensuring free movement of agricultural products like marketing, sizing
and packaging standards, labeling, analysis, inspections and monitoring.
E/ Structures for rural development
The competent authorities for rural development measures must be designated by the national
authorities (the Ministry) and subsequently approved by the Commission. Explicitly required is the
establishment of a Monitoring Committee (see point A-9 above!) to evaluate the effectiveness and
quality of implementation of the rural development programs.
The administrative structure must be able to carry out the following functions according to EU
legislation:
- identification of structural needs within rural areas;
- design, implementation and management of rural development programs;
- control of financial flows and implemented measures;
- monitoring, reporting, auditing and evaluation of the programs and individual actions.
The above listing of EU institutional requirements is not comprehensive. Details and additional
information are, however, available in the document “Guide to the main administrative structures
required for implementing the acquis, CEC, 2005.
39

F/ Statistical requirements with view to EU approximation
There is no single guideline or regulation describing the overall statistical requirements regarding the
agricultural sector for EU member states.
These types of requirements are found in particular regulations and guidelines implementing the
Common Market Organizations, the rural development schemes, the financial regulations, etc.
(statistics on exports/imports, commodity production, agricultural farm structures, farmer incomes,
subsidy payments, a number of applications, etc.).
Most of this information will be collected by the administrative bodies responsible for the schemes in
question, or also by customs, trade NGOs, public and private companies specialized in collection of
reliable statistics, or external data sources. Farmer income statistics are gathered by the FADN.
However, a number of statistical information of a more general nature is required. This information is
collected by the statistical offices of member states, in cooperation with substantive ministries.
The European Commission chair‟s a Standing Committee on Statistics. It convenes regularly meetings
with the participants of the member states to discuss matters of professional and practical interest,
methods, sources, etc. with regard to statistics in the different sectors in the Eu including agriculture.
The EU Statistical Office in Luxemburg is in charge of gathering general statistics from all sectors in
the EU including agriculture.
The best sources to consult concerning agricultural statistical requirements are the homepages and
the statistical publications of the European Commission, DG Agro and EUROSTAT. A special
publication is the Agricultural Statistical Yearbook issued by EUROSTAT.
For agricultural statistics required before EU accession it is best to look at the agricultural chapter of
reports of the EC about candidate countries published during accession negotiations. From these it
becomes obvious, which information the EU uses – and therefore requires – to assess the
economic/structural status of the agricultural sector in the country in question.
40

About the name “paying agency”
Note on the paying agency
41
Annex – i
EU member states call their institution(s) administering EU and counterpart funds for
subsidizing/supporting agriculture and rural development “paying agency” (=PA). EU funds for various
agricultural subsidies and rural development can be disbursed, in fact, exclusively through accredited
PAs, so that EU standards of financial management in handling common public funds be in any case
guaranteed.
The main function of PAs is not payment!! This name is wrong, or, let us say, at least misleading. The
main function of a PA is adjudication of agricultural and rural development subsidies. This means, it is
the PA that decides whether an applicant is entitled or not, - according to the criteria established by
law, - to receive public financial support for given agricultural and rural development purposes.
According to EU rules, each PA has a number of mandatory functions, some of which (such as
payment to the beneficiaries) it may delegate to other bodies, while some other functions it must not
delegate (such as keeping the accounts or exercising certain type of control). More often than not, for
instance, the actual transfer of funds to the beneficiaries/payment is executed by the ministry of
finance/state treasury and not by the PA itself.
The external national institutional structure relating to a paying agency
The EU Commission, that administers EU‟s common funds, cannot and does in fact not want to
interfere in internal affairs of the member states. Therefore it expects member countries to establish a
specialized institutional system that ensures, according to EU norms and standards, reliable,
transparent and traceable handling of common public funds.
In PA matters the EU wants to talk to one single authority in every country, and that is the Ministry of
Finance. In the context it calls it the “Competent Authority” (=CA). The CA is the body that is
granted/holds the powers to issue and withdraw the accreditation (=license to operate) of the PA.
Further, a) it appoints a so called “Supervising Body” (=SB) - that is usually the Ministry of
Agriculture, that makes the PA operate - and,
b) it selects a so called “Certifying Body” (=CB) - that is an independent auditing
body to regularly examine the operational system and actual performance of the PA
and to report to it to the CA (and to the EU Commission).
This means, in this PA triangle, the CA (Ministry of Finance) has the overall responsibility, the SB
(Ministry of Agriculture) holds the operational responsibility while the CB ( sometimes the state audit
office, or, in some cases, an internationally reputed auditing company on contractual basis) is
responsible for the system and performance control.
The PA itself is usually an autonomous sub-ordinate body of the Ministry of Agriculture, that is a body,
that receives its budget from and overall supervision by the Ministry of Agriculture (including the
appointment/dismissal of the director general of the PA), but has full autonomy in PA operational
matters and decisions.
The internal structure of a paying agency
Depending on how many and what type of subsidies the PA is supposed to handle ( various animal
and plant production, export, investment type etc. subsidies), its structure varies between very simple
and very complicated institutional structures. In any case, the basic functions of a PA require that it
has

- an authorization department (responsible for the decision as to who is entitled to how
much aid),
- a payment department,
- an accounting department and
- an internal control and audit department.
Moreover,
- as no country wants to give subsidies to unknown entities and since it is a great
advantage anyhow to work with known partners, countries do establish a so called
“Farm Registry,” handled by a department, and
- as the EU requires cross-checking between the various data bases regarding land-
use and animal production, it prescribes (a very complicated) “Integrated
Administrative and Control System (called IACS)”, that might not be feasible at the
outset, but needs a small department for conceptual development and coordination.
This is to say, that a PA might have six departments for starting up its operations.
Operational principles of a paying agency
Operating a PA is to pay costly, special attention to management of public funds for avoiding errors,
for excluding corruption and for establishing credibility. To this end certain operational principles and
administrative procedures are followed strictly. Such are:
- separation of the functional departments with own staff each,
- double control and double signature on every single decision (4 eyes principle),
- very tight procedural sequence ensured by computer-processing,
- the use of detailed checking lists,
- establishment and strict application of a procedural manual,
- subsidy applications only on official application forms,
- support only for registered (agricultural and rural development) clients,
- establishment and prior public announcement of subsidy criteria,
- administrative and technical control of representative samples ex-ante and ex-post.
Resource requirements
Due to the variety of duties to be performed, functions not to be mixed and the consequent application
of the 4 eyes principle, even the smallest PA must count at least 24 - 30 professionals. If the
subsidies/grant funds to be distributed amount to only a relatively small amount, the PA operation
cannot be cost-efficient.
Apart the personnel requirements accommodation, office equipment, in particular computers and some
logistic will have to figure in the budget. A special one-time item will be the elaboration of the
necessary (complicated) computer software and recurring expense for its maintenance. Also,
allowance has to be made for certain type of work to be delegated to outside agents, such as
remuneration for the outside technical and other committee-members who jointly authorize the
subsidies and for on-the-spot and other controllers of the various projects financed.
Implementation schedule
The normal lead-time for establishment of a PA is about 18 to 24 months as writing the software alone,
usually by outside programmers, takes up to 18 months (Danish experience). Following a basic logic,
and in less demanding circumstances, one can proceed to step-by-step elaboration of the basic
procedure for dealing with the claims in lesser time and then start apply the agreed procedure
manually. Such exercise is extremely useful in realizing all that is involved in processing hundreds and
thousands of applications.
Consideration has to be given also to the fact that much time is needed in case legal amendments
involving parliament and/or inter ministerial administrative agreements are necessary in a country.
42

Abbreviations
43
Annex - j
acquis or (from French)
acquis communautaire the overall body of the - obligatory - EU Community legislation
CAP Common Agricultural Policy (of the EU)
CEC Commission of the European Community (formerly)
DFID Department for Foreign International Development (of UK)
EC (the former) European Community, (now Union)
EU European Union
FADN Farm Accountancy Data Network (of EU member states and candidates
for assessing/calculating farmers‟ income)
FAO or UN/FAO the United Nations‟ Food and Agricultural Organization (responsible
for instance for coordinating agricultural censuses all over the World)
FRIDOM Functional Review and Institutional Design of Ministries (a public
administration reform program of the Government of Kosovo, financed
by UK‟s DFID and executed by an international consortium consisting
of Tribal Helm (UK), CPM Consulting (LV), Governance Institute
(SK) and Altair Assessors (SP)
HR human resources
IACS Integrated Administration and Control System (of EU member states
for the purpose of controlling payments from EU common funds)
KVFA Kosovo Veterinary and Food Agency
MAFRD Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development (of Kosovo)
MIS Market Information System (of EU members and candidates to monitor
market prices)
PMO The Prime Minister‟s Office
TA technical assistance