I.M.E.
INSTITUTE FOR MARKET ECONOMICS
82 A Dondukov Blvd., fl.3, 1504 Sofia
Phone/Fax: (359 2) 943 36 48, 943 49 75, 943 33 52, 944 71 19
E-address: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.ime.bg; www.easibulgaria.org
SURVEY
Four Strategic Sectors of Bulgaria’s Food Industry
Canned Vegetables and Fruits
Deep Frozen Vegetables and Fruits
Herbs and Spices
Honey
This Subsection: Honey
Survey Commissioned
By
GTZ Office Sofia
IME ©
SOFIA, 2001
1
F. HONEY SECTOR (HO)
The Sector Honey covers generally two different issues: honey as the main product and other
bee products like wax, pollen, geleé royale and other semi-processed items. In this survey,
only honey as the main product is considered.
The data for the analysis made below has been aggregated from NSI statistics, NEI and
Ministry of Agriculture reports, and from research and interviews we have carried out for this
survey’s purposes.
 Trends: Development in this sector appears in several directions (a) increasing the
quality of the product and thus affecting the competitiveness, (b) developing foreign
trade and winning international markets, (c) developing domestic market chains. The
market is not very mobile, because of weak market power of many of the small
producers. There is also distortion, because short-run actions on market level prevail,
and well-established customer relations and distribution channels are missing.
Scattered spot markets exist, since storage capacity and foreign demand are not
supporting continuous market exchanges. Market concentration and integration shows
that the intensity of competitiveness depends on the present market situation (supply
and demand conditions, locally and in aggregate). The horizontal integration on
producer or higher levels is still non-existent and opportunistic behaviour is still
prevailing. One should think of reducing the costs for hives.
 Quota: The only available information on existing quotas for this sector is for 1998,
however no fulfilment data can be found.
 Market channels: Since producer groups (Beekeeper Associations) are in some cases
closely linked and organized by processors and traders, market agents compete on
different levels, using contracting, pre-financing, providing consultancy and inputs to
keep control of their market share.
 Ownership: All firms and actors are private owners or operating on co-operative
level. There are approximately 12 small purchasers at production level and five
extremely large ones (covering up to 70 % of total processing and production); these
five evidently have a great impact on structure and functions in the whole sector
(integration of different levels of the honey market chain, but at the same time
concentrating market power with effects not being analysed in this study) Private
producer companies cover ca 90-95 %, cooperatives less than 10 % of the production.
There are indications of a price cartel on raw material purchase level.
 Finance and Management: Credits are much needed to keep companies’ liquidity,
yet companies can hardly get any. Existing agent-principal problems, and usually
short-run thinking and actions prevail in the segment, supplemented by lack of trust
between agents, and opportunistic behaviour. As in many other sectors in Bulgaria the
procurement of raw material depends very much on the ability of direct cash payment.
This is determining to a certain extent the strength of the actors on the markets.
Storage financing problems are not yet solved. Access to bank credits is limited, as in
other sectors, especially because collaterals market is still underdeveloped in the
country. Large processors have managed to accumulate more own capital, but depend
on export opportunities and prices margins to support profits and investments.
Informal crediting is one of the most common practices too.
 The short SWOT Analysis at the end of this chapter summarizes the HO sector’s most
important aspects.
2
1. Main Trends in Production, Consumption, Exports, Quotas
Summarizing Overview:
There are different kinds of honey, which have separate demand and prices: Monoflora;
Poliflora; Akacia.
The structure of producers’ professional representation and trade agents consists of three
Beekeepers Associations (one of which is family-based, one for large companies, and the
other – with 100-years history and numerous local structures). A Draft Law for Beekeeping
and Honey Production has been put forward in the Parliament, but is non-operative yet.
Chamber for beekeeping is under planning.
The honey branch shows a great variety of producers and traders. One of the main
characteristics is that honey production is in many private hands and often not done in a
professional or commercial manner (hobby, part time business, subsistence). Some producers
are members of umbrella processor-companies and/or bee unions or traders, or at least have
contracts with them. There is confusing information about sector statistics regarding number
of producers and production volume. But the Ministry of Agriculture tries to bring more
transparency into this sector by publishing a yearly honey report. Starting in 2002, a
registration of beehives is required at the National Veterinarian Office.
Synopsis of Various Economic Indicators
The short overview in this section shows the most important characteristics and tentative
trends of the Honey sector in aggregated form. Currently, the NSI and the Ministry of
Agriculture provide controversial data. We will display data from both sources. According to
available information, the data of the Ministry of Agriculture is based on observations of the
National Beekeepers Union, which claims to have the more realistic values.
3
Table 1: Main Indicators of The Honey Sector (NSI)
Year
Item
Annual Honey Production Capacity
Actual Honey Production
Optimal Number of Beekeepers
Actual Number of Beekeepers
Optimal Number of Beehives
Actual Number of Beehives
Actual Number of Apiaries
- of which professional
Annual Honey Yield per Hive (in kg)
Actual Honey Imports
Annual Honey Export Capacity
Actual Honey Exports
Domestic Market Capacity for Honey
EU Duty-free Import Quota
1997
1998
Tons
TUSD
12000
5008
90 000
about 50000
600 000
266 000
9 292
25
18,8
365
4500-6500
4 260
374
5 281
Tons
1999
12000
5464
TUSD
Tons
12000
5746
90 000
about 45000
600 000
266 000
8 724
15
20,5
90 000
about 40000
600 000
296 000
28 573
262
19,4
52
4500-6500
2 915
8000 T
63
4500-6500
3 857
310
Notes on the table:
The table is incomplete and gives only tentative information, accumulated by the
NEI Study Team but has not been officially used till now. The data about exports
and imports and other variables show some inconsistency with other data sources,
but are useful for intra-sector comparison
Balance 1997/2001
4
Table 2: Honey Production and Use Balance (1997/2001)
YEAR
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001*
100
1 085
3 405
5 172
2 741
7 200
7 800
8 550
6 725
7 500
365
52
33
21
15
7 665
8 937
11 988
11 918
10 256
1 630
2 017
2 300
3 100
3 200
Processing
100
200
220
250
300
Fodder for bees
250
400
500
550
600
Export
4 600
2 915
3 777
5 277
6 100
Total consumption
6 580
5 532
6 797
9 177
10 200
On stock (end of year)
1 085
3 405
5 191
2 741
56
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001*
9
100
314
477
253
92
100
110
86
96
Import
702
100
63
40
29
Total
86
100
134
133
115
Consumption
81
100
114
154
159
Processing
50
100
110
125
150
Fodder for bees
63
100
125
138
150
Export
158
100
130
181
209
Total consumption
119
100
123
166
184
32
100
152
80
2
SUPPLY
On stock (beginning of year)
1)
Production
Import
Total supply
USE
Consumption
* estimated
Honey balance (1998=100)
on stock (beginning of year)
Production
On stock (end of year)
* estimated
1)
1998 = 100
Source : Honey Report of Ministry of Agriculture year 2001
Notes on the table:
- This table from the Annual Report 2001 of Ministry of Agriculture on the
Honey Sector gives a very good overview of the supply and demand side and
shows the general trend of increasing honey production and decreasing stocks.
5
2. Market Channels for Honey
Figure 1: Market Channels for Honey
Means of production
1)
trade
Honey Production
Producers (unregistered)
Producers (registered)
small*
medium1)
large
1)
interal
consumption on
producers' level
unconventional
market channels
Other small groups
and traders
(whole sellers)
Large
companies
(whole sale) 1)
trade and storage
marketing
trade and storage
marketing 1)
domestic market
consumption
food
import
non food
export
1) to some lower extend vertically integrated with large producers / traders
6
3. Ownership Aspects
According to the collected information, all firms and actors are private owners or
operating on co-operative level. Private producer companies cover ca 90-95 %,
cooperatives less than 10 % of the production.
There are approximately 12 small purchasers at production level and five extremely
large ones (covering up to 70 % of total processing and production); these five
evidently have a great impact on structure and functions in the whole sector
(integration of different levels of the honey market chain, but at the same time
concentrating market power with effects not being analysed in this study).
4. Some Characteristics of Financing and Management
A small survey (mainly by telephone interviews and direct contacts) has been carried
out to assess relevant problems in the field of financing and management
qualification. As expected, the experience showed that these very sensitive issues
couldn’t be assessed without in depth analyses. The results we are providing in the
tables below are first-step approaches shedding some light on the main issues.
Many small and unprofessional producers, some regional traders, and few large actors
dominating export activities characterize the honey sector. The concentration of
processing and trade has two different aspects: the concentration of the dispersed
production can be seen from the viewpoint of market power which distorts the
competition and, on the other hand, as an instrument facilitating the marketing
particularly the export by bundling small charges.
Table 3: Access to Credit and Financing
General assessment
General
Problems
Financing by credits is needed for keeping liqidity (working capital), respectively to
secure supply of agricultural raw material and other inputs of production; credits for reinvestment and upgrading the production technique; credits to finance exports and export
risks
Honey faces in general the same financing problems as all other companies in Bulgaria,
low value collateral and low profit expectations are pronblems on the company side,
banks are rather unwilling to credit stocks and sales contracts
Bank Credits
Heavy bureaucractic burden, high interest rates, high colllaterales.
Some larger companies have relative better opportunities than smaller ones
NGO-Credits
Only for closer clients and partners;very difficult to join NGO-projects, micro-crediting
State Fund
Formalities for request quite complicated; knowledge of procedures and close contacts
with respective decision-makersis a pre-condition.
International
Supporting
Programs
Specific criteria have to be met (e.g. SAPARD); pre-financing by bank loans difficult
Other Sources
Depending on company stucture , holdings provide easier credits
7
Table 4: Qualification of Management in Honey Sector
General Assessment
Technological
Knowledge
Business
Experience
Foreign
Languages
Participation in
international
fairs
Direct contacts
Available to relative high standards at all large companies
Only some of the largecompanies with separate marketing department
Most speaking any West European language, Russian ist the most frequent named
language; language skills often not sufficient to do direct negotiations
Some companies as direct participants and exhibitors
with
Almost all companies being in export business, some have joint ventures
international
companies
Information from
Almost all companies
Internet
Own website
Only some of the companies but many are planning to start with own page
Experience in
Export
In all exporting companies, some under 10 years, most over ten years; management has
longest experience (over 10 years)
5. SWOT Analysis of the HO Sector
The following table summarizes current issues of the HO Sector in the structural form
of a SWOT Analysis.
8
Table 5: SWOT ANALYSIS FOR HONEY
Strengths
Weaknesses
Natural conditions in Bulgaria
are favorable for honey production
Quality of Bulgarian honey is
higher than most of the main world
producers (Argentina, China)
Beekeeping unions are aware of
the importance of quality control
management for increasing the
export
Informal vertical integration of
production means and product
marketing
High
concentration
of
processing, trade and export (5
major companies have more than
50% of the export share)
Production volume is dependable on weather
conditions (dry seasons)
Low concentration of production (lots of small/
nonprofessional and scattered producers)
oor hygienic
conditions at producers’ level (storage facilities,
second hand containers, antibiotica impurities),
mixing with old or low quality honey or adding sugar
substitutes (Maize sugar)
Low know how at small producers’ and
newcomers’ level
The (3) existing national beekeeping unions
compete rather than cooperate (few collective
actions)
Big players determine the market in general, but
there is also interference by not organized producers
and dealers on spot markets
No formalized markets and commodity exchanges
for honey to guarantee free price building
Lack of market transparency
Exporters are not able to manage and handle
export of high quality honey and are satisfied with
selling it for industrial purposes
Opportunities
Threats
standards
and control will improve the
domestic and export marketing
Export of high quality honey will
result in higher export prices
Ecological honey production as
good
opportunity
already
recognised
Opportunistic behavior of minor dealers and
powerful agents – obstacle for free market conditions
The present market structure (producers) –
obstacle for introducing quality control
Poor market power of producers in maintaining the
quality of the honey
Rent seeking behavior of powerful processors and
traders
Value added chain – earnings from export do not
(establishing
collection
and reflect directly prices of honey on producers’ level
wholesale markets) will improve
Insufficient financial resources for technological
supply of raw material and quality
improvements
9
F1. Sub-Sector Honey (HO)
1. HO Sub-Sector Overview
The section below presents information on the HO Sub-Sector. It begins by a general
overview (data, raw material base, classification of companies, etc.), describing the
key issues and structure of the HO Sub-Sector. The detailed information and material,
on which the overview is based, are presented both in numerical and graphical form
(both figures and maps). They cover the following: (1) downstream sector (raw
material); (2) HO producers1; (3) HO exporting companies; and, (4) origin and
direction of exports2.
(1) General Aspects
Data Coverage and Development Perspectives
The sub-sector Honey is covered by the official production and export statistics in a
fragmentary way. In particular, it is difficult to get a clear overview on the production
of raw materials. This is due to the fact that individual collectors and many stations
and businesses for procurement cover the greatest part till now. The survey covers the
data for raw material base for two different years (1999 and 2000), received from
different sources.
Regional Production of Raw Materials
In our survey, we present the production of raw material for two years – 1999 (as
before presented both numerically and cartographically) and 2000 in comparison
between the data from different sources.
Regional Concentration of HO Companies

The highest concentration of companies involved in the HO Sub-Sector is
in Sofia (34 companies) and Varna (7 companies). The advantages of their
location in Sofia are obviously the lower transaction costs for
communication and logistics and the close location to administrative units
(customs etc.).
(2) Numerical Synopsis of Structural Characteristics
The table below summarizes the main aggregate indicators of the HO Sub-Sector.
1
The main producers of honey are small economies, so there is no available information on producing
companies.
2
Our survey considers only one product (honey); it does not cover other bee products.
10
Table 1: Structural Data about the Honey Sub-Sector
Item
YEAR
UNIT
Honey
Structural Data
exporting companies
2000
number
57
importing countries
2000
number
31
products exported
2000
number
1
groups of products exported
2000
number
1
Production, Sales, Export, Employment
production
1998
ttons
sales
1999
Mln BGN
43,4
export value
2000
Mln BGN
9,3
employees
1999
number
891
Economic Coefficients (Productivity)
sales
per employee
1999
TBGN
49
export value
per employee
1999/2000
TBGN
10
11
Table 2: Gross Margin Calculation per Beehive
Item
Quanties and Prices
Sum BGN
1.Revenues
Average yield of Honey
20 Kg x
1,50 BGN
Queen (one for 5 years)
0,2 x
9,00 BGN
1,80
Regenerated offspring (one for 5 years)
0,2 x 30,00 BGN
6,00
Total revenues
30,00
37,80
2.Costs
Winter feed (surar)
20 Kg x 1,00 BGN
20,00
Winter feed (sugar dough)
2 Kg x 3,50 BGN
7,00
Medicaments
2,00
Wax for honey combs frame
4,00
Insurance, Fees
Depreciation for Hive
Depreciation for Equipment
Packages for selling
no
150,00 BGN/ Hive, 10 % Depr.
15,00
16,00 BGN/ Hive, 6% Depr.
1,00
40 pieces x 0,15 BGN
6,00
Total costs
55,00
3. Gross Margine/Hive
-17,20
Source : Own calculations, based on expert's and producer's interviews
Notes on the table:
- The table shows that the gross margin in Bulgaria displays a negative value –
revenues received for one beehive are less than the costs for developing it.
- The price received for 1 Kg honey is quite low – the purchasers buy at too
low price. Also, the prices for queen and offspring are very low.
2. HO Raw Material Base: Production and Regional Concentration
The statistical data for the production of honey show the total honey supply. The
following presentations show important characteristics of the honey production as a
base for further processing.
(1) Summarizing Overview


The regional concentration of raw honey production in 1999 is presented
first in table and then in map format. The regional concentration of raw
honey production for 2000 is presented in table format and compared in
graphical form.
1999/2000 NSI and 2000 BBU statistics have been used as the primary
data source.
12




There are several honey types, displaying different demand and prices.
Honey production is not recognized as a professional occupation, but is
considered more like a hobby or part-time business.
The quality of production is unstable due to lacking modern equipment
and storage capacities.
Costs of production and marginal productivity in the processing sector are the
decisive factors. Unfortunately, there are no observations at all available in
Bulgaria.
(2) Numerical Synopsis of Regional Production and Concentration in 1999
In the following synoptic table, the statistics of honey production are presented in
numerical form. Individual crop shares in the regions are shown later in form of maps.
13
Table 3: Honey Production Volume per Region
REGION
Blagoevgrad
Bourgas
Varna
Veliko Tarnovo
Vidin
Vratza
Gabrovo
Dobritch
Kardjali
Kiustendil
Lovetch
Montana
Pazardjik
Pernik
Pleven
Plovdiv
Razgrad
Rouse
Silistra
Sliven
Smolian
Sofia (City)
Sofia
Stara Zagora
Targovishte
Haskovo
Shumen
Jambol
TOTAL
TONS
131,3
481,8
324,7
510,0
159,1
269,2
87,0
489,2
78,0
89,6
127,1
221,8
67,0
77,3
389,1
145,1
203,1
331,7
285,7
121,2
34,8
25,0
156,6
113,2
152,1
256,1
165,0
254,9
5 746,7
SHARE
2,3
8,4
5,6
8,9
2,8
4,7
1,5
8,5
1,4
1,6
2,2
3,9
1,2
1,3
6,8
2,5
3,5
5,8
5,0
2,1
0,6
0,4
2,7
2,0
2,6
4,5
2,9
4,4
100,0
Source : NSI, Newspaper "Capital"
Notes on the table:
- The production of honey has a relatively uniform distribution across the
country. The largest is the volume produced in the Veliko Tarnovo region – 482
tons.
(3) Cartographical Presentation of Selected Variables (1999)
14
Map 1: Regional Concentration of Honey Production
Силистра
5
2.8
8.5
5.8
Видин
3.5
4.7
Монтана
Добрич
Русе
6.8
3.9
Разград
Плевен
2.9
2.6
8.9
Враца
Велико Търново
2.2
София
5.6
Търговище
Шумен
Варна
1.5
Ловеч
Габрово
Перник
1.3
0.4
2.7
Бургас
2.1
Сливен
Гр. София
8.4
2
1.6
4.4
2.5
Кюстендил
Стара Загора
1.2
Ямбол
Пловдив
Хасково
Пазарджик
4.5
2.3
Благоевград
0.6
1.4
Смолян
Кърджали
Относителен дял
%
5.8
4.4
2.6
1.6
0.4
-
8.9
5.8
4.4
2.6
1.6
Notes on the Map:
- Honey production is concentrated in Veliko Tarnovo, Bourgas, Dobrich, and
Pleven.
- The smallest quantities are produced in Sofia (City) and Smolian.
(4) Numerical Synopsis of Regional Production and Concentration for 2000
The table shows different figures, according to different statistical sources – the
difference in quantities and number of hives between NSI and BBU is quite big
Table 4: Production Volume and Number of Hives for Honey per Region in 2000
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
28
NSI
Region
No. hives Kg/hive
Blagoevgrad
8 654
12,5
Bourgas
22 216
21,5
Dobritch
25 049
18,8
Gabrovo
5 196
16,6
Haskovo
18 968
14,1
Jambol
12 721
24,7
Kardjali
7 430
11,6
Kiustendil
5 267
16,0
Lovetch
11 924
10,9
Montana
11 789
27,0
Pazardjik
5 588
18,6
Pernik
6 372
8,0
Pleven
17 426
16,3
Plovdiv
14 842
10,1
Razgrad
9 729
20,8
Ruse
15 830
21,7
Shumen
17 520
5,9
Silistra
11 971
26,0
Sliven
6 991
16,7
Smolian
3 883
8,2
Sofia
10 902
12,5
Sofia (City)
2 609
11,1
Stara Zagora
14 761
6,0
Targovishte
12 120
11,9
Varna
11 989
26,2
Veliko Tarnovo
17 802
10,2
Vidin
11 356
13,5
Vratza
13 961
17,9
TOTAL
334 865
15,9
BBU
Tons
No. hives Kg/hive
108,0
11 854
11,8
477,0
25 216
18,9
471,9
26 200
23,3
86,0
8 100
10,6
267,8
18 968
17,9
314,0
15 683
20,0
86,0
11 500
15,7
84,0
9 300
10,2
130,0
17 700
14,2
317,9
17 600
22,1
104,0
12 600
8,7
51,0
8 380
6,1
284,0
18 500
16,2
149,9
19 900
10,1
202,0
13 600
16,2
343,0
19 300
20,7
103,0
19 100
6,5
311,0
19 981
27,5
117,0
12 783
11,7
32,0
7 890
9,5
135,9
15 980
11,1
29,0
6 700
10,4
89,0
16 871
9,5
144,0
16 800
15,7
314,0
18 300
19,1
181,9
19 800
12,6
153,0
15 200
19,1
250,0
15 865
6,3
5 337,7
439 672
15,3
NSI=100
Tons
No. hives Kg/hive
140,0
137
95
477,1
114
88
609,9
105
124
85,9
156
64
339,9
100
127
314,0
123
81
180,0
155
135
95,0
177
64
252,0
148
131
389,0
149
82
110,0
225
47
51,0
132
76
300,1
106
100
200,0
134
100
220,0
140
78
400,1
122
96
124,9
109
111
550,1
167
106
149,9
183
70
75,0
203
115
178,0
147
89
69,9
257
94
159,9
114
157
262,9
139
132
350,1
153
73
250,1
111
124
290,0
134
142
100,1
114
35
6 731,4
131
96
Tons
130
100
129
100
127
100
209
113
194
122
106
100
106
133
109
117
121
177
128
235
131
241
180
183
111
137
190
40
126
15
Source : NSI, BBU, ITCC
Notes on the table:
According to the NSI, honey production for 2000 is primarily concentrated in
Bourgas (477 t.), Dobritch (471 t.), and Rousse (343 t.). BBU presents
concentration mainly in Dobritch (610 t.), Silistra (550 t.), and Bourgas (477 t.).
(5) Graphical Presentation of Comparison Between the Data from Different Sources
The following figures present in visualized way the comparison between the above
numerical data coming from different sources. Clearly, a difference on the regional
level3 in production volume, number of hives, and share of production per unit exist.
Figure 1: Relative Share of Honey Production Volume in Tons per Region
(Comparison between NSI and BBU Data)
60 000
50 000
40 000
Tons 30 000
20 000
10 000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Regions
Notes on the figure:
- The difference between the BBU and NSI data is of 1,4 ttons.
- The biggest is the difference between the data received from Silistra (239 t.) and
Dobritch (138 t.).
3
The numbers on the horizontal axis represent the respective administrative region in line with the
table in the numerical synopsis.
16
Figure 2: Relative Share of Number of Hives per Regions (Comparison between NSI
and BBU Data)
1 200
1 000
800
Tons
600
400
200
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Regions
Notes on the figure:
- The difference between the BBU and NSI data is 105 th. Hives.
- The biggest difference is between the data received in Silistra (8 th. h.), Pazardjik
(7 th.h.) and Varna (6 th.h.).
- The only region where the data is the same for both BBU and NSI is Jambol. All
other regions display difference of at least 1 thousand hives.
Figure 3: Relative Share of Production per Unit (Comparison between NSI and BBU
Data)
60
50
40
Tons 30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Regions
Notes on the figure:
- The data varies: in some regions, NSI data has higher values than BBU data; in
others, vice versa. In total, however, this variance is insignificant.
- The biggest difference is in Vratza and Pazardjik –NSI shows higher values than
the BBU. There is no difference in data for Plovdiv.
17
4. HO Exporting Companies
The following presentations aim to display typical characteristics of (a) exporting
companies, (b) prices for exports and the share of export of total sales (tentative
relation 1999/2000).
(1) Summarizing Overview
The following aspects are of interest:



A total of 4,7 ttons with a value of BGN 9 million was exported in 2000.
Data covers results from a total of 57 companies exporting HO.
29 of them are reported to have profit for 1997/1999.
(2) Graphical Presentation of Selected Variables
(a) Comparison Between Company Types (Aggregates)
Figure 4: Regional Concentration of HO Exporters in 2000
Number
0
2
4
6
8
10
SOFIA
VARNA
34
PLOVDIV
BURGAS
RAZGRAD
DOBRITCH
STARA ZAGORA
MONTANA
VRATZA
SHUMEN
SLIVEN
Notes on the figure:
- High concentration of companies in Sofia, Varna, Bourgas and Plovdiv.
- Concentration in Sofia has administrative reasons, but could also be caused by
willingness of companies to be closer to the central government (lobbying, rent
seeking).
(b) Comparison (Export Share) Between Individual Companies
The comparison of sales and exports across years is analytically not usual and precise,
of course. However, we are doing this calculation because no compatible data and any
other information are available. The results received show two aspects (a) there is a
18
large variance between companies in the period 1999/2000 and (b) obviously some of
the companies (at least with the relation above 100 %) show impressive relative
export growth. Further investigations are needed to present more accurate
comparisons.
Figure 5: Export 2000 as Percent of Sales 1999 at Company Level
Rilaimportexport OOD
Apitreid OOD
Aslanar
Beles Komers OOD
Aliaska-TP Temelko Poriazov
Sizif
Ram Komers
Pchelarstvo
Hani
Agro Pro -OOD
Palhutev Med
Neri I Aziago
Bulket & Co
Valcuria
Gerada-GM
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Export 2000 as Percent of Sales 1999
Notes on the figure:
The figure shows extreme value for the first company “Rilaimportexport” – which
has over two times higher relative share of sales than the next company “Apitrade”
and more than 40 times higher value than the last one in that list – “Gerada-GM”;
19
Table 5: Volume of Honey Export by Biggest Companies to Different Countries
COMPANY NAME
RAM KOMERS
SIZIF
BULGARKOOP
BUL-MED
BELES KOMERS - LTD
ASLANLAR
KORINT S. A.
SOLO TRADING
NERI I AZIAGO
APIMEL JSC
EMA
PALHUTEV
PCHELA - 94
NIK-60 - GLOBAL KOMERS
HONEY
ALIASKA-TP
RILAIMPORTEXPORT
BULKET AND CO
SIZIF - STEFAN KUDROV
AGRO PRO - LTD
DIA - LTD
Other 36 companies
TOTAL
COUNTRY
Germany
563,5
40,8
Greece
5,5
Austria
40,6
103,6
291,2
Poland
24,4
France
20,0
382,7
Italy
Turkey
60,1
137,2
121,1
261,8
251,1
260,4
Spain
Oth. Countr.
61,1
81,1
46,0
121,1
48,0
20,1
10,2
221,8
20,6
178,9
195,0
6,5
160,6
107,8
19,3
99,7
68,0
45,1
15,2
13,2
55,9
55,4
38,4
40,6
40,3
40,3
57,6
1 560,5
129,8
867,5
476,0
15,8
54,3
461,1
402,7
20,9
392,9
60,1
70,3
46,0
66,1
121,1
355,5
TOTAL
685,2
632,6
489,8
344,7
278,4
261,8
261,3
260,4
221,8
215,6
185,4
160,6
123,0
99,7
81,2
64,4
55,9
55,4
54,2
40,6
40,3
40,3
4 652,6
Notes on the table:
- The largest exporting company is “Ram Komers” with 15 % of the whole
export 2000. It is specialized in exporting to Germany.
- Next in the list are “Sizif” (14 %) and “Bulgarkoop” (11 %). They export
mainly to France and Austria, respectively.
- Most of the companies are specialized in exporting to one or two countries.
- The biggest importer in 2000 is Germany, receiving 34 % of the export.
Second is Greece (19 %), Austria and Poland have 10 % each.
5. HO Export Origins and Destinations
The following provides an overview of the geographic origins and destinations of
foreign trade with Honey. The numerical figures are not displayed here.
(1) Summarizing Overview

The figures and tables below display the HO export volume in the year 2000
from the viewpoint of exporting regions (the 28 administrative regions of
Bulgaria) and importing 31 countries. Data is based on export statistics 2000.

Only the volumes (in tons) at the export origin and import destination are shown
here. The values associated with the exported volume, as well as the prices
received or paid could also be shown upon request. A further, detailed analysis
concerning a particular product or company could also be provided.
(2) Graphical Presentation of Selected Variables
The following map and graphs show in a synoptic view the variance and
concentration of geographical origin and destination of HO exports (aggregates).
20
Map 2: Origin of Тotal Еxports 2000 – Relative Share of Exported Quantity (Bulgaria
Total=100)
Силистра
Видин
Русе
Добрич

Разград

Монтана
Плевен

Враца
Шумен

Варна
Търговище
В Търново
Ловеч
Габрово
София - град
Перник

София - обл
Сливен

Бургас

Ст Загора
Кюстендил
Ямбол

Пловдив
Пазарджик
Относителен дял на предприятията
%
 60
Хасково
Благоевград
Смолян

Кърджали

30
6
Относителен дял на производството
%
83 - 84
1 - 4 .7
0 .1 - 1
Notes on the map:
- The largest exports from Bulgaria are registered in Sofia, Dobritch, and
Ragrad regions.
Figure 6: Origin of Total Exports (Volume in Tons, by 28 Regions of Bulgaria)
Tons
0
SOFIA
DOBRITCH
RAZGRAD
PLOVDIV
STARA ZAGORA
MONTANA
VRATZA
VARNA
SHUMEN
BURGAS 1,00
SLIVEN 0,01
50
100
150
200
250
300
3 899
21
Figure 7: Destination of Total Exports (Relative Share by Country)
Italy
8%
Turkey
2%
Spain
1%
Others
8%
France
9%
Poland
10%
Germany
33%
Austria
10%
Greece
19%
Notes on the figure:
The share of the other 23 countries not shown on the figure is only 8 % of the total
export 2000.
22