LASTING EFFECTS OF THE EU SUGAR MARKET REFORM 
IN POLAND
Study of the farmers’ assessment of promising agricultural niches, 
induced by the sugar market reform in Europe

Roman Molas – USida R&D, Warsaw, Poland
Adam Kupczyk – Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW, Poland
Jarosław Osiak – University of Ecology and Management in Warsaw, Poland

The European Union (EU) is the world leader in the production of white sugar from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. subsp. vulgaris), owing to the moderate climate, the long tradition of cultivation, and the fertile soils. Brazil is the overall leader in the production of (brown) sugar, which there is obtained from sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). 
In Poland, the cultivation of this important industrial crop, has more than two hundred years of tradition. Its beginning dates back to 1801, when on the Konary estate in Lower Silesia (the area of the former Polish Kingdom, which was later annexed by Prussia), Franc K. Achard built the world's first sugar factory. Production of raw materials for the plant, because of its high cost-effectiveness and ease of production, attracted great interest from farmers. 
A record-breaking area of sugar beet cultivation was recorded in Poland in 1975, when it amounted to nearly 500 000 hectares (1). In 1990, the area was already lower, approximately 440 000 hectares (ha); the average yield of sugar, meanwhile, increased slightly, amounting to roughly 30 t/ha. The average size of a single plantation was only 1.15 ha, the result of predominately hand cultivation (weeding and hoeing). In practice, this area was cultivated by each farmer's family. Migration of youth to urban areas, thereby decreasing the number of hands to help with the hard work in rural areas, and the drastic reform in 2006 of the EU sugar market (2), reduced the number of growers in 2008 to roughly 40,000 and the beet cultivation area to 180 000 ha. In the second year (2008) of the reform (Production Quota System) in EU, production decreased by one-third (3). Reduced or eliminated production in many sugar factories, including Poland, resulted in the abandonment of traditional production and a strong reduction in the sugar-beet cultivation area. The year 2009 (the third year of the reform), showed the fast achievement of 96% implementation goals of the sugar market reform in Europe (4). Many countries had completely abandoned the cultivation of beets; others had to reduce their production. Some author concludes (5) that countries benefited most from the reform were: Germany and France (the largest producers), Denmark, Austria, and the United Kingdom, by increasing their own production. Whereas in 2005, Polish sugar production took place in 40 sugar factories, in 2011, there were only 18 active plants (ibidem). However, a large number of them belong to one of the German, French, or British companies (market share 61%) (6). 
Currently, Poland, previously a significant exporter, is now an importer of sugar. The findings of study by Trajer (7) showed, that in 2011/2012, Poland imported nearly 50 000 tons. In 2015, Poland imported sugar from Germany, France, Danmark, Czech, Mauritius and Mozambique, of more than 200 000 tons (8). Similar changes were found in Romania (9). In recent years, the average area of plantations in Poland increased to 4.3 ha and the yield of sugar beet to approximately 50 t/ha. According to preliminary estimates, the sown area of sugar beet in Poland in 2013 was 185 000 ha, 4.2% lower than it was in the previous year (10). At the other hand, the profitability of beet cultivation has decreased over many years, also in comparison with the basic direction of agricultural production (3). The average technology yield of sugar (mass of raw sugar per hectare of beet planted) in Poland is one of the lowest in the EU, amounting to 8.7 t/ha in the 2011/2012 season (the crop range was 54 t/ha). The mean yield in the EU is 11.5 t/ha (almost one-third more). The average yield in France is 13.4 t/ha, and in Germany 11.3 t/ha, with yields of 75 t/ha (11). Next step of biological and technical progress in Poland was achieved during the 2012/2013 season. The beet yield reached 63.74 t/ha, and the technological sugar yield increased by 11%, although it is still less than 10 tons (9.64) per hectare (6). These data show the low competitiveness and profitability of sugar beet production in Poland (as cultivated in coldest area of Europe). Some EU member states must to import sugar to meet domestic consumption, including Poland (5). At the same time, the EU can produce far more sugar than the amount limits. In the 2011/12 season, non-quota sugar production exceeded 5 million tons. In Poland, this amounted to almost 500 000 tons, increasing to 2 million tons in the 2012/2013 season (6). This sugar cannot be used for human consumption within the EU economic area under threat of penalties. It has to be exported to third-world countries or treated as a renewable-energy source and allocated to the production of ethanol. 
Important social benefits are expected from the development of a new biofuel industry. Primarily, there should be done an increase of employment that allows farmers to generate new income, and there, should be seen faster community development. The benefits for these small communities should appear, although this may be oversimplified, through reversing the flow of money for energy. As an perfect example of positive changes is seen the community of Güssing in Austria. This community previously imported energy, has become self-sufficient in its energy use (2001), and currently is an exporter of renewable energy, especially from biomass. Recent information indicates that the whole of Burgenland Province in Austria, the first in Europe, has achieved self-sufficiency in electricity from only renewable sources (12). This cannot be achieved without the sustained cooperation and training of farmers and local governments, which promote new ideas. Lack of communication with the farmers immediately results in protests against the location of modern technology power plants—wind turbines, biogas, waste incineration plants, and even photovoltaic installations. 
In 2006-2009, as part of the restructuring of the sugar market, it was planned to use the closed-down sugar factories in Poland to start the production of alternative biofuels as well as electricity and heat from biomass (13). Sugar beet was on the list of crops that received financial EU support for production. This gave farmers an interesting and viable prospect for cultivating new energy crops while maintaining their current beet Crops, but for the new industry (1). The maximum area of agricultural land covered by the support for energy crops in the European Union amounted to 2 million hectares. Exceeding this area resulted in reduced payments throughout the Community, under 45 €/ha. The large-scale, simple cultivation of rapeseed for biodiesel, and corn for biogas production grew very quickly. In 2010, the subsidies were suddenly eliminated, without considering the consequences this would bring to the cultivation of perennial crops. These crops are most important for the production of second-generation biofuels and feed the modern biorefineries (which produce cellulosic ethanol and biochemicals). In Poland, at the peak of interest in biomass production (2008-2009), there were roughly 200 000 hectares of crops grown by farmers for energy purposes, including 20 000 hectares of plantations of lignocellulosic perennials. After the withdraw of subsidies, the area of the latter quickly dropped to 2 000 hectares: 1 300 of willow, 600 of Miscanthus giganteus, and 100 of Virginia fanpetals (14). 
The aim of this study was to illustrate the changes in the structure of sown areas previously dedicated to sugar factories for sugar beet production. An important aspect of the study was to draw attention to the tendency of farmers to create decisions and to the challenges of a new type of agricultural production.

Methods
Two surveys were conducted to determine the greatest interest in cultivation of energy crops for biorefineries. Farmers’ new perspectives on producing first-generation liquid and solid biofuels, and on their acceptance, were studied in 2009 and four years later, in 2013. The study was mainly concerned with the two communities of farmers’ preferences and motivations regarding the introduction of new types of products. 
Surveys were conducted in January-May 2009 and February-May 2013.
The subjects of the study were two different communities of farmers who lived near two closed sugar factories in Poland, Eastern Europe (in the provinces of Lublin and Podlasie), roughly 400 km apart from each other. The study looked at the farmers’ preferences and cultivation diversification decisions, under emphasis of the new economic conditions. The surveys were conducted randomly among former suppliers of sugar beet. Participants were chosen from farmers in the immediate vicinity of liquidated sugar plants (within a radius of up to 40 km). Each group consisted of more than 200 persons, representing 40 to 60% of the former growers in their area. Each survey in each location included more than 400 persons, in four groups each year (Table I). 
The respondents were divided into two groups, young farmers in the “40-” group and older farmers in the “40+” group. The survey was conducted using the PAPI (paper and pencil interviewing) method, consisting of direct personal interviews with each respondent, meeting the objective conditions of research (we did not know who had been previously surveyed), and using mass sampling (we selected more than 200 individuals per group), random sampling (we did not use the contract manufacturer’s letters suggested by the former sugar factory staff), and standardized research activities. PAPI has been judged to be the most effective method in rural areas (roughly 90% accuracy), in contrast with cities environment, where the average efficiency is only 60% or so. The reliability of the method is estimated at 95%. The survey included questions about the different natures of the farms activity (agriculture commodity, producing only for their own needs, services, mainly by agriculture, activities other than farming, organic).
Questions were also related to the age and education level of the owner of the farm, the importance of nonagricultural activities, land use, and crop area. In addition, the survey asked about the number of livestock—cattle, pigs, and poultry—as well as an economic sense of the new production directions in the „energy farms”. From the beginning, the study excluded any survey questions about data farmers considered as sensitive, such as the number of people living at the farm, and the number of people employed.
The most important results from the surveys are shown in the tables. We also exploited in the study the data from the EC Council and Commission Regulation (EC) concerning the limits of sugar production in the years 2005/06-2009/10 in the EU, and on secondary data provided by the Polish FAPA/FAMMU (Foundation of Assistance Programmes for Agriculture/Foreign Agricultural Markets Monitoring Unit). In addition we used data from the Polish government's Agricultural Market Agency newsletters and the GUS, the governmental statistical office.

Table I. Number of surveyed farmers, depend on regions and years
Province	Groups	2009	2013	
Lublin	40-	108	112	
	40+	115	110	
Podlasie	40-	112	115	
	40+	111	107	
Total	446	444	

Description of the study area in Poland
Lublin Province is located in the central-eastern part of Poland. It borders to Belarus and Ukraine. Podlasie Province is located in the northeastern part of Poland, bordered by Lithuania and Belarus, both form the eastern border of the European Union. Lublin and Podlasie Provinces have been recognized as among the poorest in the European Union, and both experience below-average incomes for Poland. The only common denominator is a high share of agricultural employment. Support for farmers from the sugar factories was as follows: the grower received a loan of seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, and a supply of raw beets. This support system for sugar growers continues through today. In both regions, in the 1989/1990 season, the number of suppliers’ beet growers was 6 231, and in the 2005/2006 season, the number of farmers decreased to 1 433 growers. This could indicate a specialization among these farms in sugar beet production. As part of the national action aimed at farmers who partly or completely lost their sugar-beet production market in 2009, the government launched a bailout fund for modernization by charging of 40% surcharge on the cost of purchased machinery (15). The amounts of the aid were in the range of 500 € to 12 000 € per farm. In Lublin Province, roughly 200 applications were filed, and in Podlasie, there were approximately 400. The farmers will purchase machines, included tractors, sprayers, seeders, and trailers, very often as second-hand. In 2010, another program (with a 50% surcharge for costs) was launched for small agricultural-sector businesses to invest in renewable energy. In whole Lublin Province, due to complicated legal and administrative EU’ procedures, cumbersome paperwork and excessive demands two proposals were accepted, and one proposal was accepted in Podlasie. Thirty applications were accepted across all of Poland, five for the construction of biogas plants and twenty-five for the production of pellets or briquettes (ibidem).

The Lublin Province
Most inhabitants, 37.6%, are employed in agriculture, and just over 18% are employed in industry and nonmarket services. The unemployment rate for the Lublin region in 2008 was 10.9%. It was in 2013 over 13%. Farmland accounts for approximately 59% of the region’s area. Statistically, the farming area in Lublin Province is lower than the national average; in 2008, it was 7.34 ha. According to statistics, Lublin Province has roughly 150 000 ha of the poorest soils, those in the IV, V, and VI Polish classes (14).

The Podlasie Province
At the time of the survey, 400 000 or so people were employed in agriculture, representing 34% of the population; in the sugar-beet industry were employed 16%. The unemployment rate was roughly 15% in 2013. Total arable land covers roughly 800 000 ha, and an additional 170 000 ha are grassland. The mean statistical farm area is 11.96 hectares. In this region, there is no soil in classes I or II, which would be suitable for the cultivation of sugar beet. Most of the soil is of classes IV and V, yielding scant beet crops despite intensive fertilization (14).

The empirical basis for study
The basis for the first study of farmers’ preferences under the new economic conditions of 2009 was the high prosperity in energy crop production and the planned construction of a number of biorefineries. It was also planned to maintain the current sugar beet cultivation but for another purpose: the production of biofuels. Raw materials shold be transported at the distance of 20 km from the closed sugar mills, which for the proposed biorefineries was very advantageous for economic reasons (low cost of transport). The distance from the defunct sugar plant in Podlasie Province, was in some cases more than 100 km, which has no economic rationale. We do not provide these data in the tables. The leading theme at the survey meetings was to determine the farmers’ strong and weak preferences under the new perspective modern alternative agriculture (for energy production), and the farmers' knowledge about energy crops. The register of energy crops commanding in 2009, the European support system fee (45 €/ha) included several species. The energy crops approved for charging the costs of establishing plantations (first-generation food crops) were rapeseed, turnip rape, rye, corn, flax, hemp, sugar beet, and soy, provided that each intermediate part was used to produce energy. The nonfood, second-generation energy crops were listed as follows: thornless rose, Sida hermaphrodita, Miscanthus giganteus, artichokes, Sakhalin knotweed, reed canary grass, willow, poplar, and black locust.
The research was repeated in 2013 to test the durability of the emerging trends from 2009.

Results 
 Brief information about the external perspective during the study
In Europe, as the final goal, cultivation of sugar beet will be maintained only by the farmers who obtain a minimum of 15 tons of raw sugar per hectare, whereas in Poland, the best producers can exceed only 9-10 tons of sugar from one hectare of cultivation (1). Interest in a new perspective (homegrown energy) in Europe after the reform of the sugar market was huge (16). In Great Britain, in 2010, roughly 1.8% of the total area of agricultural land (109 thousand ha) was used to grow crops for energy; 75 000 ha of wheat, 14 000 of sugar beet, and 20 000 of perennial crops (Miscanthus and willow). In the year before (2009), beet occupied only 6 000 hectares, and wheat for ethanol was not grown at all. This change in the crop structure was related to the opening of the Ensus Biorefinery in Teesside in 2010 (17). In general, there are a number of ethanol production technologies, and there is also a many kind of raw materials that can be used for its production (18). In Germany, the basic raw materials for ethanol production are wheat and sugar beet, in range 70% and 30% respectively. Poland becomes an importer of ethanol, from sugar beet and wheat from Germany. In the United States, the production of sugar from sugar beet is also quoted. Growing interest in the cultivation of this crop for the production of ethanol has been observed (19). In the 2009/10 season, the per-ton price of sugar beet in the United States was an average of 50 US $ (37.5 €); in the following year, the price increased to 62 US $ (46.5 €) per ton. Yields were then roughly 60 t/ha. One good example is the construction of a biorefinery in the previously (2008) closed Spreckels sugar factory in Mendota, California. In the beginning, the pilot scale is supposed to be produced of approximately 75 000 liters of ethanol from 10 000 tons of beet. Ultimately, by 2016, the biorefinery is expected to produce 10 million liters of ethanol, 50 000 m3 of bio-methane, 6.3 MW of green electricity, natural compost, and liquid fertilizer. Approximately 500 people will be employed there, half on permanent contracts (20). 

Brief information about the Polish perspective during the study
According to a study carried out in the framework of the EC (European Commission) project called REFUEL, in 2007, Poland had approximately 12% of the EU’s biomass resources, which placed our country at the forefront of all of Europe (21). The minimum price for sugar beet in Poland still fell from 46.72 €/t (2005) to 32.86 (2006), 29.78 (2007), and 26.29 (2008-2012). In the 2013/2014 season, Polish sugar factories will pay 37 €/t, plus or minus 1%, depending on the sugar content in their beets (22). In 2009, in the Lublin region, crop structure accounted for 65% of grain acreage, corn for 9%, and rapeseed for 6% (14). Since the reduction of sugar beet cultivation, the acreage remaining after its cropping has been devoted to different products, typically rapeseed, corn, and vegetables. The reduction or even elimination of sugar beet for food was for Polish farmers a huge shock. Similar assessments emerged from an Italian study (23). The findings of study by Tybora (24), showed that in Poland, where it was only possible, was proposed to maintain the traditional sugar production but for other purposes; ethanol in particular, but alternatively, to upgrade farms for the production of additional renewable energy. It was proposed that a number of energy crops be grown. These species could be grown on 70% of the available agricultural acreage around liquidated sugar factories without conflicting with the cultivation of food.

Surveys and research results
The study was conducted using the PAPI method, with farmers from each group (Lublin and Podlasie Provinces) and subgroup (40- and 40+), with a total of 446 persons in 2009 and 444 in 2013. The interviews were direct face-to-face interviews with the respondents, meeting the objective conditions during the study required by the mass interview and standardization of research activities, in accordance with national guidelines (25). This paper presents the data obtained from the questionnaires administered to randomly selected farmers. Another method was applied by Bzowska (11). In Bzowska’s study, the respondents were farmers selected by the staff of the sugar factories. There were producers of sugar beet plantations, on more than six hectares each, all significantly larger than the average in Lublin Province. The results from our surveys in 2009 and 2013 (Table II) revealed a strong relationship between changes in sugar beet farming and changes within the sugar industry. 

Table II. Percentage of declared (planed) structure of cultivated crops, depend on the region and age group (in 100%) 
Province 
and farmers’  age	2009	2013	
	C	F	R	S*	O	B	C	F	R	S*	O	B	
Lublin    40- 	50.0	10.2	11.1	14.8	2.8	11.1	41.1	8.9	21.4	4.5	20.5	3.6	
Lublin   40+	59.3	10.6	5.3	18.6	3.5	2.7	70.9	7.3	9.1	10.0	1.8	0.9	
Podlasie 40-	42.8	19.6	12.5	15.2	0.9	8.9	46.9	24.4	13.9	1.7	8.7	4.4	
Podlasie 40+	55.8	15.3	6.3	13.5	3.6	5.4	65.4	18.7	4.7	6.5	2.8	1.8	
C = corn and cereals, F = fodder, R = rapeseed, S = sugar beet for ethanol, O = other (fruit bushes, herbs, vegetables), B = targeted production of energy crops for biorefineries or pellet’s plants. * = Under only one condition, when the price per tonne of beet, will be paid of more than 50 €

Survey data revealed significant changes in crop structure, particularly in the area of previous​​sugar beet production. There was an almost complete withdrawal from beet cultivation. The leading preference of farmers for agriculture alternatives was also dramatically reduced. The findings of study by Osiak et al. (26), showed that farmer’s decisions about cultivation of crops species are short-term and mainly based on a rational premise - current incomes. This is the basic explanation for the sudden decline in interest of cultivation of perennial energy crops, when subsidies disappeared. In our research, the farmers’ expectations exceeded the price of 40 €/t for return to sugar production, and 50 €/t for the production of ethanol and bio-methane (Table II). This is the farmers’ gate price, with the simultaneous resignation by the farmers of beet leaves at higher prices. Other studies have also determined the profitability levels of sugar beet as to be very low (3). This situation determines the farmers’ conditional limits on the high price of raw beet. The loss of a market for the production of sugar has caused the emergence of new (2009) and old trends (2013) of production. Some farmers, due to reform left to themselves, chose an old simple way, and returned to easily cultivated cereal crops (rye, wheat), rapeseed, and corn for grain. This was particularly true to older farmers (Table II). Abandonment of sugar beet crops resulted in the strong development of the dairy industry in Podlasie Province in favor on to be easy produced maize and grass silage. However, the average value of the maize yield in the Podlasie region is lower than the national average. Nevertheless, the largest part of the growers who moved away from sugar beet production preferred the production of maize for silage as feed for dairy cattle (Table II). Similar results were obtained in studies by Bojar and Grzech (15). The younger farmers were more familiar with the new direction of the field production of energy crops for biorefineries, and with the topic of renewable energy (Table III).
Table III. Percentage of declared farmer’s recognition of species and its cultivation of energy crops, depend on the region and age group
Province
and farmers’ age	2009	2013	
	W	M	S	C	R	1-2G	W	M	S	C	R	1-2G	
Lublin    40- 	74.0	32.4	18.5	64.8	92.6	9.3	62.5	8.3	19.6	87.5	94.6	24.1	
Lublin    40+	53.1	8.9	10.6	36.3	64.6	4.4	49.1	4.6	9.1	72.7	91.8	19.1	
Podlasie  40-	76.8 	40.2 	19.6 	71.4 	99.1 	9.8 	73.9 	21.8 	10.4 	90.4 	93.0 	21.7 	
Podlasie  40+	70.3	18.9	9.01	94.6	92.8	4.5	56.1	18.7	4.7	93.5	98.1	15.0	
W = willow, M = M. x giganteus, S = S. hermaphrodita, C = corn, R = rapeseed, 1-2G = Generation of crops for biofuels 

As shown in Table III, the willow has proven to be the most recognized energy crop. Sida hermaphrodita Rusby (Virginia fanpetals) is unknown, although it may be mowed twice a year: in May–June as the substrate for biogas plants and in January–March, in the dry stage, to produce pellets or briquettes or be pressed into bales for direct combustion/pyrolysis. None of the farmers knew the differences in the cultivation requirements for these crops, but they are fundamentally different (27). Willow and Miscanthus can be grown in soils rich in water (28). There is little competition for acreage between the crops for consumption and fodder (it must be cultivated on better soils), and the perennial energy crops that give satisfactory yields in medium and poor soils of Polish classes IV to VI (29). 
More than 35% of respondents in 2009, and 25% in 2013, had general knowledge of the cultivation of perennial energy crops. Increased knowledge of the willow in the province of Podlasie is closely related to the research carried out at the University of Warmia and Mazury, located a short distance away. There, willow is a leading crop. Alternatively, the greater knowledge of growing Sida in Lublin Province than in the province of Podlasie, may be associated with research at the University of Life Sciences in Lublin. There, in turn, Sida is a leading plant. 
Just as in the whole country, the reform of sugar beet production resulted in a change in farm incomes (Table IV). 
Table IV. Percentage of declared income structure of farmer’s homestead, depend on the region and age group (in 100%) 
Province 
and farmers’ age	2009	2013	
	F	N	S	L	A	E	F	N	S	L	A	E	
Lublin     40- 	53.7	9.3	12.9	11.1	12.1	0.9	56.3	17.9	14.3	7.1	2.7	1.8	
Lublin     40+	50.4	29.2	5.3 	7.1	4.4	3.5	45.5	40.9	7.3	3.6	1.8	0.9	
Podlasie  40-	48.2	12.5 	15.2	6.3	13.4	4.5	57.5	13.9	14.8	7.8	3.5	2.6	
Podlasie  40+	50.5	27.0	4.5	8.1	5.4	4.5	42.1	37.4	6.5	13.1	0.0	0.9	
F = farm producing for sale,  N = fallen farm producing for their own needs, S = extern services and trade, L = livestock production, A = Alternative as bio-energy production, E = organic farm, and other

After sugar factory production ceased, the space occupied by beets was allocated to crop production for livestock feeding. It should be noted that the low price paid for sugar beet for several years, and the media publicity of the sugar crisis, discouraged growers from returning to the production of sugar beet. More and more farmers began to seek additional income outside the farm, through trade and services or by expanding on the hidden unemployment in fallen farms. The growing area of fallen farms, as revealed in the results shown in Table IV, is worth noting; there was a strong increase in the number of farms producing only for the survival of the families running them (N- farm producing for their own needs). 
This is also revealed in the results from our research in 2013 (Table V). According to our estimates and statements from the questionnaires, willingness to cooperate hovers at 46% or so. In 2009, younger farmers were twice as enthusiastic about collaborating with biorefineries. Some growers who were directly interested declared very high readiness, from 80% to 93% (Table V). Farmers, after the failure of plans to build biorefineries, completely reduced their enthusiasm for new directions in field production (2013).
Table V. Percentage of declared readiness for change of old income (from Table IV) to new one; home-grown energy farming, depend on the region and age group
Province 
and farmer’s age	2009	2013	
	F	N	S	L	A	E	F	N	S	L	A	E	
Lublin     40- 	86.2	80.0	71.4	33.3	x	38.5	9.5	20.0	12.5	12.5	x	0.0	
Lublin    40+	43.9	48.5	33.3	25.0	x	25.0	8.0	8.9	25.0	0.0	x	0.0	
Podlasie  40-	92.6	78.6	41.2	28.6	x	20.0	9.1	25.0	17.7	22.2	x	0.0	
Podlasie 40+	46.4	50.0	40.0	33.3	x	20.0	5.0	14.3	14.3	0.0	x	0.0	
F = farm producing for sale,  N = small farm producing  for their own needs, S = extern services and trade, L = livestock production, A = Alternative as bio-energy production, E = organic farm, and other 

Despite the tremendous amount of information and propaganda, to date (2016) in Poland, no one biorefinery has been built that uses beet for ethanol or biogas. For each region with the resources and the lack of alternatives, the move toward renewable energy production is a great opportunity to diversify incomes and jobs.
As seen in the survey results the expectations for large revenue and jobs in a prospective biomass sector were very high (2009), and the disappointment exceptionally strong (2013). Therefore, acceptance of the unknown cultivation of plants initially reached nearly 100% and was higher among the younger and more educated farmers (Table V, 2009). 
A similar relationship is confirmed by research on Miscanthus cultivation acceptance by farmers in France (30), especially those farmers who had to reduce their sugar plantations. In other countries, and this is supported by studies in Spain, the situation was the same; the younger and better educated were more likely to cultivate new energy crops (31). Kwasniewski achieved similar results regarding the acceptance of new lines of agricultural production (32). The tendency to use proven (inherited), old methods of field production is reflected in the research of Bzowska-Bakalarz et al. (11). This is also confirmed by our results: the tendency of older farmers to opt for simple, low-risk production is very high. 
Familiarity with the trends, renewable-energy prospects, and the newest technologies was negligible during the study, amounting to fewer than 10% of the young farmers (-40) in both provinces. In the group of older farmers (40+), none showed any interest in or knowledge about the new technologies. 
It is worth noting the growing percentage in the farming population of people with secondary and higher professional agricultural education (Table VI).

Table VI. Farmer's declared education level, depend on the region and age in accordance with values in Table I
Province
and farmers’  age	2009	2013	
	N	P	S	S*	U	U*	N	P	S	S*	U	U*	
Lublin     40- 	0	25	73	70	10	9	0	16	84	81	12	11	
Lublin    40+	2	54	51	46	8	6	1	42	58	56	9	8	
Podlasie  40-	0 	29 	70	67 	13 	12 	0	19 	82 	81 	14 	14 	
Podlasie  40+	2	53	45	38	11	9	2	42	53	41	10	9	
N = no modern primary education, P = primary education, S = secondary education, S* = agricultural high school, U = university degree, U* = agricultural university degree. N+P+S+U=100% of the number of surveyed farmers in Table I; S* is part of S, U* is part of U, as the clarification of type of education.
The obtained survey data may contain a little degree of imperfection owing to the complicated population structure in the Polish countryside. Because of the economic crisis, there is so-called hidden unemployment, estimated by a nongovernmental organization to affect as more than 900 000 people, mostly young people, who are not landowners. The value is as high as 60% of the population among those up to 34 years of age. In total, every second rural resident is unemployed (33). 
Against this background, it is worth paying attention to the new project, ELECTRA, and its potential benefits for farmers in Poland. With social cooperation between investors, the research team, and farmer communities, the project arranged to build a series of  biogas plants (34). The program lasts for two years and covers all of Świetokrzyskie Province. The project has the social admittance to build a network of biogas plants approved to date by 66 rural municipalities, 93% of the whole. There are plans to build dozens of biogas plants with a total capacity of approximately 200 MW. From the beginning of talks with farmers and presentations in every county there has been noted only a single protester objection. A new educational process was also approved; the intentional education of future personnel to work in the planned biogas facilities for youth from selected municipalities, with a guarantee of employment. The plan is to partially restore production of sugar beet and some of the aforementioned new energy crops (such as Virginia fanpetals) for the proposed biogas plants.

Conclusions
The overall conclusion is that moving toward the newest future agricultural production is largely dependent on the farmers’ ages (the older are more conservative), education levels (higher is better for accepting new technologies), farm sizes (larger plantations can more easily finance the investment), and opportunities to invest in modern farming equipment (preferential loans, subsidies). Younger farmers are more predisposed to make the industrial investments based on new raw materials for the biorefineries, but they want still to be ensured on the contracted agricultural production (crops targeted for power plants). Both age groups, regardless of the province, still considered contracting as better system for farmers’ incomes, than the production for market, with its risks. The surveys also showed a gradual change in the social structure of farm communities through the increased numbers of the young and educated.
 
References

1. Chmielewska, B.: The strategy of agricultural development, agricultural and rural areas on the Mazovia example. Synthesis of the results of research carried out in 2005-2009. National Research Institute of Agricultural Economics and Food Economy, Warszawa, 2009, s. 51. Polish.  www.ierigz.waw.pl 
2. Jagiełło, W.: The restructuring of the sugar industry - the implementation of the mechanism in Poland. Newsletter of the Government Agriculture Agency (ARR) 9, 2009, s. 18-23. Polish.
3. Chudoba, Ł.: Newsletter of the Government Agriculture Agency (ARR) 33, 2008, s. 6. Polish.
4. Artyszak, A.: The consequences of three years of the reform of the EU sugar market. Scientific Journal Warsaw University of Life Sciences SGGW – Problems of world agriculture 8, 2009, s. 5-9. Polish.
5. Taberska, A.: The national sugar market. Newsletter of the Government Agriculture Agency (ARR) 4, 2012, s. 27-29. Polish. 
6. Mucha, M.: Status and prospects of the sugar industry in Poland. Presentation at the conference after the sugar beet campaign, Warsaw, February 2013. Polish. 
7. Trajer, M.: The sugar market. Report of the Bureau of Research and Programming government's Agency for Agriculture (ARR) 3,  2013, s. 4. Polish.
8. ARR.: News of Agricultural Market Agency (ARR), a state institution supervised by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in Poland, 2015, s. 1.
9. Dinu, T.A., Arghiroiu, G.A., Stoian, E., Darie, O.D., Patrascu, G.: The Romanian external trade in sugar and confectionery products. AgroLife Scientific Journal 1, 2012, s. 202-208.
10. IERIGZ, Newsletter.: Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics National Research Institute, No 5, 2013, Poland. http://www.ierigz.waw.pl/ s. 1.
11. Bzowska-Bakalarz, M.,  Ostroga, K.: Analysis of technologies employed in farms specialised in sugar beet production. Agricultural Engineering 7, 2011, s. 5-19. 
12. Österreichischer Biomasse-Verband (ÖBV), Newsletter.: 
http://www.oekoenergie.cc/service/top-news/newsletter/details/article/tag-der-energiewende-im-burgenland/ 17.09.2013, s. 1. German. 
13. Pazgan, B.: National Programme for the restructuring of the sugar industry. Newsletter of the Government Agriculture Agency (ARR) 10, 2009, s. 4-13. Polish.
14. GUS, Reports.: 2007; 2008; 2009; 2010; 2013. Polish Gov. Central Statistical Office. http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus/index_ENG_HTML.htm
15. Bojar, W.L., Grzech, M.: Problems of modernization management of national farm equipment in the light of available funding sources. Journal of Central European Agriculture 11, 2010, s. 19-26. Polish. 
16. Haque, I., Rozakis, S., Ganko, E., Kallivroussis, L.: Bio-energy production in the sugar industry: an integrated modeling approach. Paper prepared for the 113th EAAE Seminar “A resilient European food industry and food chain in a challenging world”, Chania, Crete, Greece, Sept. 3-6, 2009, s. 14.
17. DEFRA, Newsletter.: The UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-energy-crops-potential-and-constraints-review , 2013, s. 27
18. Sanchez, O.J., Cardona, C.A.: Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Bioresource Technology  99, 2008, s. 5270–5295.
19. Maung, T.A., Gustafson, C.R.: The Economic Feasibility of Energy Sugar Beet Biofuel Production in Central North Dacota. Selected paper prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Ass. AAEA, CAES & WAEA, Joint Ann. Meeting, Denver, Colorado, July 25-27, 2010.
20. The Business Journal.: 
http://www.thebusinessjournal.com/news/energy-and-environment/5151-mendota-beet-ethanol-plant-gets-5m-grant , 2013, s. 1.
21. Kupczyk, A., Londo, M., Wiśniewski, G.: Role of Poland in the European strategy for biofuels. Preliminary results for REFUEL Project. PSO PPA Project: Biomass and Biofuels in Poland. Workshop Biofuels, 19 June, 2007. Warsaw, Presentation for Ministry of  Environment. 
22. Farmer, Newsletter.: Portal of modern farmer.
http://www.farmer.pl/produkcja-roslinna/okopowe/cena-minimalna-za-buraki-w-ksc-8211-148-zl-t-netto,42802.html , 2013, s. 1. Polish.
23. Vaccari, G., Marchetti, G., Lenzini, G., Tamburini, E.: New proposal for integrated production of sugar and biofuels from sugar beet. Chemical Engineering Transactions 12, 2007, s. 231-236.
24. Tybora, B.:. National Restructuring Programme - the aid for diversification. Newsletter of the Government Agriculture Agency (ARR) 4, 2012, s. 30-32. Polish.
25. Sztabiński, P., Dyjas-Pokorska, A.: Basic Techniques of Sociological Research in evaluation, training materials. Ministry of Regional Development, Warsaw, 2008, s. 73. Polish.
26. Osiak, J., Skudlarski, J., Izdebski, W.: Assessment of farmer’s potential decisions on setting up perennial plantations of Energy plants. TEKA Komisji Motoryzacji i Energetyki Rolnictwa – OL PAN 9, 2009, s. 199–204.
27. Borkowska, H., Molas, R.: Two extremely different crops, Salix and Sida, as sources of renewable bioenergy.  Biomass and Bioenergy 36, 2012, s. 234-240.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.10.025
28. Borkowska, H., Molas, R.: Yield comparison of four perennial energy crop species. Biomass and Bioenergy 51, 2013, s. 145-153.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.01.017
29. Borkowska, H., Molas, R., Kupczyk, A.: Virginia Fanpetals (Sida hermaphrodita Rusby) Cultivated on Light Soil; Height of Yield and Biomass Productivity. Polish Journal of Environment Study 18, 2009, s. 563-568.  http://www.pjoes.com/abstracts/2009/Vol18/No04/list.html 
30. Bocquého, G., Jacquet, F., Reynaud, A.: Determinants of miscanthus adoption: an empirical investigation among French farmers. Paper submitted to the the 5èmes Journées de recherches en sciences sociales INRA/SFER/CIRAD, Dec. 8-9, 2011, Dijon, France, s. 42.
31. Giannoccaro, G., Berbel, J.: The Determinants of Farmer’s Intended Behaviour Towards the Adoption of Energy Crops in Southern Spain: an Application of the Classification Tree-Method. Bio-based and Applied Economics 1, 2012, s. 199-212. 
32. Kwaśniewski, D., Kuboń, M., Malaga-Toboła, U.: Potential of using renewable energy sources and plants for future in ecological farms in farmer’s opinions. Agricultural Engineering 2, 2012, s. 63-69. 
33. EUPC, Report.: Foundation - European Center for Enterprise. http://www.eucp.pl/index.php?site=0&kat=6&v=en , 2013, s. 2. 
34. PAP, Newsletter.: Polish Press Agency.
http://www.naukawpolsce.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news,395700,naukowcy-132-megawaty-energii-z-biogazu---kropla-w-morzu-mozliwosci.html , 2013, s. 1. .Polish.

Molas R., Kupczyk A., Osiak J.: Lasting Effects of the EU Sugar Market Reform in Poland

Europe is a world leader in the production of sugar from sugar beets, thanks to the long tradition of cultivation and the fertile soils there. In Poland, the industrial cultivation of this important rotation crop has more than two hundred years of tradition. 
Drastic reform of the European Union’ sugar market (production quota system) in 2006, led to the abandonment of traditional cultivation, strong reduction in sugar production, and the liquidation of many sugar factories. In Poland, during the period of great interest in new perspectives of biofuel production (2009), and again, four years later (2013), a survey was conducted on two groups of farmers. Each group consisted of 200 persons, comprising from 40% to 60% of the previous growers. The results show significant changes in the surface area of sugar-beet production. Farmers’ preferences for alternative agriculture also changed definitely. 

Key words: sugar beet, sugar market, sugar crops, EU regulation, farmers’ income.