Difference between revisions of "Land concession for mushroom picking"
m (1 revision imported)
(ids and related to)
|Line 83:||Line 83:|
Latest revision as of 18:05, 18 September 2016
Brief description of the instrument and its modus operandi
The instruments sets the contractual agreements between NFA and private companies in respect to the rules of picking mushrooms from state forests
Which problem the instrument is supposed to solve?
regulation of mushroom picking in NFA forest
Purpose or main objective / overall goal of the instrument?
To set rules for the provider (NFA) and buyers (companies that have to organize picking) for the payment of the mushrooms estimated to be extracted
Side objectives/goals of the instrument?
To create a formal instrument that could bring more transparency on the selling of mushrooms on the market and to impose some rules for the un-destructive collection of the mushrooms
Innovation content or potential of the instrument?
No innovation rather a classical regulatory instrument
Which laws and regulations support the implement of this instrument?
Forest Code, 2008
The initiator/promoter of the instrument?
Which organizations are involved in the operationalization of the instrument?
National Forest Administration Suceava through its local administration units
How the monitoring is ensured?
The company has to provide to the NFA the following documents that could allow the control of the picking: a) the position of the acquisition places established by the company for pickers b) names and identifications permits of pickers. c) acquisition bookkeeping with the collected data. d) number plates of the cars which will assure the transportation of the collected mushrooms. e) transportation documents with the amount of mushrooms collected. f) to inform the NFA of any illegal collection done by other firms
How the compliance is ensured?
In case that the company is not able to provide proper acquisition and transportation documents the NFA can confiscate the entire quantity and the contract will be cancelled
How is the overall performance of the instrument?
The instrument creates the base for companies to document the provenience of the quantities used for processing
In practice, the mosaic of properties provides opportunities for other companies to set a contract with a private owner in the same area and in fact to collect mushrooms from state forests in the detriment of the companies which have a contract with NFA. The capability of control of NFA in this direction is reduced so picking is still done chaotically in most of the areas
Stakeholder consultations – both NFA representative and the owner of a company
Brief description of the context for the emergence of the instrument
The need of the processing companies to provide the origin of the mushrooms
Have any of the items mentioned above changed since the instrument entered into force?
Is there any qualitative or quantitative study of the impacts of the instrument?No
|Zone||South East Europe|
|Regions (NUTS 2)||North East region|
|Focus on NWFP||Direct|
|Affected activity||Harvesting/Production +|
|Affected actors||Picker/harvester/hunter +|
|Geographical scope||Local +|
|Instrument type||Economic +|
|Lcname||land concession for mushroom picking +|
|Legal status||Binding +|
|Name||Land concession for mushroom picking +|
|Policy area||Forestry +|
|Reference ID||578 +|
|Regions||North East region +|
|Response set||Suceava Instrument A3 - Agent 3 Pickers +|
|Zone||South East Europe +|