No C 56/22 Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 3. 89 
'spot checks' should be properly defined and it should 
be recognized that it will be more expensive for some 
Member States than others. Does this allow for the 
whole consignment to be checked? Does this allow for 
sampling for diagnostic tests? 
3.3.2. It must be made clear that if the new system 
is to be successful in practice, something more thorough 
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1988. 
A. GENERAL COMMENTS 
1. The Committee largely endorses the five objec­
tives underpinning the research programme on competi­
tiveness of agriculture and better management of agri­
cultural resources. 
1.1. Aiding farmers not so much to adjust as to face 
up to the new Common Agricultural Policy (a) while 
at the same time maintaining farm incomes (b) is essen­
tial in order to prevent the new production and market 
trends increasingly dominating the world scene from 
having disastrous repercussions on Community agri­
culture. 
1.2. Measures to encourage agriculture in disadvan­
taged areas (c) form part and parcel of the broader than documentary control is needed at the point of 
destination. 
4. Community responsibility 
It is essential that adequate veterinary staff to carry 
out the Community responsibility of inspection will be 
available, and to ensure that there is similar interpret­
ation of the standards throughout the Community. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
blueprint for European cohesion and of the process of 
rectifying the imbalance between favoured and less-
favoured regions instigated by reform of the Structural 
Funds. Supervision and improvement of the environ­
ment and the countryside (d) is unquestionably a matter 
of close concern to the entire community but particu­
larly, for obvious reasons, to farmers. Stepping up 
the transfer of information (e), while expanding and 
exploring the various processes of education and dis­
semination, is one of the most effective ways of optimiz­
ing the results of the proposed activities. 
2. These five points relate to the major problems 
confronting agricultural and environment systems in 
the economically and technologically developed 
countries, both now and in the medium and long term. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a research programme on competi­
tiveness of agriculture and management of agricultural resources (1989-1993) 
(89/C 56/08) 
On 6 October 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 130Q of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Com­
mittee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 1 December 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr Serra Caracciolo. 
At its 261st plenary session (meeting of 14 December 1988) the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
6. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 56/23 
In particular, preservation of the environment per se 
or, in other words, for coming generations, for many 
different purposes (viz. generation of commodities and 
income and improvement of quality of life) is a key 
component of future development. 
2.1. These themes, among other things, can easily 
supplement those of other Community programmes 
connected with 'biotechnologies' and 'agro-industrial 
technologies'. 
3. Along with the other Community programmes, 
such action can play a useful role in backing up agricul­
tural research in the individual Member States by boost­
ing research standards and hence stimulating more orig­
inal and competitive research findings and innovations 
at international level. 
B. SPECIFIC COMMENTS 
4. Shared-cost activities 
4.1. To optimize all potential spin-off benefits for 
research institutes in the Member States, the role of 
the co-funders (which, under Article 1, need not be 
restricted to national authorities but can include other 
agencies organizing major research programmes) 
should be specified more clearly. 
4.2. With this in mind, the Standing Committee on 
Agricultural Research will have to play a more active 
part in providing prior guidance and subsequent moni­
toring as regards both procedures and activities. 
5. Adjustment to new market conditions 
5.1. At the end of point 3 a) (i) of the Annex to the 
proposed Decision, add the following sentence: 
'Cellular and molecular techniques for improving 
plant and animal production, though normally a 
matter for the biotechnology research programme, 
can also be usefully incorporated here.' 
5.2. Research innovation aimed to develop high-
standard agricultural products should focus on three 
aspects: 
— scientific methods to determine quality from the 
angle of (a) nutrition and health and (b) typicality 
and the preservation of organoleptic characteristics 
as well as (c) the absence of residues from pesticides 
or any pollutant substances, — non-traditional approaches to obtain high quality 
plant, animal and processed products definable in 
terms of reliable parameters, 
— socio-economic surveys of consumer demand for 
such products, to be seen in relation to existing and 
potential supply trends. 
5.3. Research in the broader field of agricultural 
marketing seems more advanced in non-Community 
countries. Greater efforts should be made on this front. 
The packaging of agricultural products is also of par­
ticular interest. 
5.4. Alternative use of abandoned farmland. As 
worded at present, the text is very broad and unsuited to 
conditions in regions with very limited land resources. 
Consequently research should concentrate on identify­
ing and testing multi-criteria methods for the manage­
ment of multipurpose operational resources (subject 
to stringent conservation and land re-use constraints). 
Suitable areas would be agri-tourism, replenishment of 
wildlife, replanting or rare vegetation and polyvalent 
use of forest undergrowth, etc. The phrase '... profitable 
alternative uses ...' is too vague. 
6. Maintenance of earnings 
6.1. The first paragraph, which lends itself to narrow 
interpretations of the development of farm entrepre-
neurship, should be better phrased. The present word­
ing seems to assume that the only way to deal with 
tight market outlets is to reduce production inputs. 
7. Improvement of livestock health 
7.1. Since this objective, as worded at present, does 
not refer to research but rather to technical assistance, 
immunological biochemical and molecular biology 
research aimed at obtaining new diagnostic techniques 
and disease prevention measures could be proposed. 
8. New guidelines for marginal areas 
8.1. The Committee suggests introducing the con­
cept of 'farming systems in marginal areas struggling 
to contend with environmental, structural, social or 
economic constraints', whose problems differ from tho­
se of regions slow to develop. 
No C 56/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 3. 89 
9. Development and implementation of the Com­
munity inventory of agricultural research (AGREP) adequate human and practical resources to the pro­
duction of input and exploitation of output. 
9.1. This data bank, set up under Regulation (EEC) 
No 1728/74 has been more or less operational in all 
Member States for some years now—even if it attracts 
little enthusiasm and mobilizes even fewer resources. 
9.2. It would therefore be very helpful to know who 
does what—and where it is done in the Community; 
the Commission should: 
— take prompt steps to improve the structure and 
contents of AGREP to make it more attractive; 
— take suitable measures to persuade governments and 
agencies responsible for national centres to allocate 10. Evaluation 
10.1. Evaluation, as conceived in the proposal, is 
designed to ensure continuity. The specific monitoring 
activities proposed are effectively geared to programme 
management so that, for instance, the research dissemi­
nation and transfer processes and the impact of research 
on farms can be assessed as accurately as possible. 
10.2. The directions necessary for coherent appli­
cation of the methods should be given. The models 
must have an open approach, within the scope of the 
programme, and ensure the full viability of the inte­
grated system: environment, production and consump­
tion. 
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 80/215/EEC on animal 
health problems affecting intra-Community trade in meat products 
(89/C 56/09) 
On 24 October 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Com­
mittee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 1 December 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr Storie-Pugh. 
At its 261st plenary session (meeting of 14 December 1988) the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
The Committee approves the Commission proposal. 
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE