Developing the typical dairy products of Thessaly

Transcription

Developing the typical
dairy products of Thessaly
Diagnosis and local strategy
January 2014
January 2014
REFERENCES
This publication has been produced as part of the LACTIMED project with the financial assistance of the
European Union under the ENPI CBC Mediterranean Sea Basin Programme. The contents of this document are
the sole responsibility of the University of Thessaly (UTH) and the Mediterranean Agronomic Institute of
Montpellier (CIHEAM-MAIM), partners of LACTIMED project, and can under no circumstances be regarded as
reflecting the position of the European Union or of the Programme’s management structures.
LACTIMED aims to foster the production and distribution of typical and innovative dairy products in the
Mediterranean by organising local value chains, supporting producers in their development projects and
creating new markets for their products. The project is implemented under the ENPI CBC MED Programme, and
is financed, for an amount of EUR 4.35 million, by the European Union through the European Neighbourhood
and Partnership Instrument.
The European Union is made up of 28 Member States who have decided to gradually link together their knowhow, resources and destinies. Together, during a period of enlargement of 50 years, they have built a zone of
stability, democracy and sustainable development whilst maintaining cultural diversity, tolerance and individual
freedoms. The European Union is committed to sharing its achievements and its values with countries and
peoples beyond its borders.
The 2007-2013 ENPI CBC Mediterranean Sea Basin Programme is a multilateral Cross-Border Cooperation
initiative funded by the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI). The Programme objective
is to promote the sustainable and harmonious cooperation process at the Mediterranean Basin level by dealing
with the common challenges and enhancing its endogenous potential. It finances cooperation projects as a
contribution to the economic, social, environmental and cultural development of the Mediterranean region. The
following 14 countries participate in the Programme: Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Jordan,
Lebanon, Malta, Palestinian Authority, Portugal, Spain, Syria and Tunisia. The Joint Managing Authority (JMA)
is the Autonomous Region of Sardinia (Italy). Official Programme languages are Arabic, English and French.
© Copyright LACTIMED 2014. No part of this publication may be reproduced without express authorisation. All
rights reserved for all countries.
Electronic version available on: www.lactimed.eu
AUTHORS

-
Report written by:
Main authors: Dimitris Goussios, University of Thessaly, Konstantinos Tsiboukas, Agriculture University of
Athens, Theodosia Anthoupoulou, Pantuion University of Athens;
Contributions: Vasileiadis Anastasios, expert in entrepreneurship ("Marketing systems and weaknesses of
marketing strategies" section, pp. 44-45), Dimitra Gaki, University of Thessaly (parts 1.2.3., pp. 16-18 and
2.2.2., pp 44-48);

-
Implementation of fieldwork:
Main experts: Dimitris Goussios, Konstantinos Tsiboukas, Theodosia Anthoupoulou, Dimitra Gaki;
Junior experts: Goulas Apostolos, Louka Konstantia, Poutsiakas Nikolaos, Makris Georgios, Seggi
Chrisavgi, Mardakis Prodromos and Faraslis Ioannis;

SWOT analysis (in addition to the aforementioned experts): Tsampra Maria, University of Patras, Perucho
Lola, veterinarian;

Creation of maps: Mardakis Prodromos, University of Thessaly;

-
Layout and proofreading:
For the CIHEAM-MAIM: Selma Tozanli and Hamid Bencharif;
For ANIMA: Jeanne Lapujade.
2
January 2014
GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS
AEI
AGROCERT
AGROVIZ
CAP
CRSN
DAYOK
EEC
EFET
EKKYZ
ELGO DIMITRA
ELOGAK
ELSTAT
ETHIAGE
EVOL
GDP
GMO
EX TAXES
IACS
ISO
KEK
LEADER
LSU
LTD
MINAGRIC
OGEEKA DIMITRA
OPAACH
OTEX
PDO
PEP
PGI
R&D
RICA
SME
SVET
SWOT
THESgala
THESgi
INC TAXES
TUI
UAL
UE
YAAT
University, Institute of Higher Education
Agricultural products certification and supervision organisation
Cooperative union division of the Trikala regional unit specialising in feed production
Common agricultural policy
French national strategic reference framework
Directorate of agricultural and veterinary economics
European economic community
Unified actor of food control
Animal feed movement control laboratory
Hellenic agricultural organisation "DIMITRA"
Hellenic milk and meat organisation
Hellenic statistical services
National institute of agricultural research
Volos dairy cooperative
Gross domestic product
Genetically modified organism
Excluding taxes
Integrated administration and control system
International standardisation organisation
Training centre
Liaison between actions for the development of rural economy
Livestock unit
Limited company
Hellenic ministry of rural development and food
Agricultural training organisation "DIMITRA"
Integrated programmes for the development of the PIDER rural space
Technico-economic orientation of farming
Protected designation of origin
Regional operational programme
Protected geographical indication
Research and development
Farm accountancy data network
Small and medium enterprise
Thessaly business and industry association
Strengths weaknesses opportunities threats
Thessaly livestock breeders' group
Thessaly farmers' group
All taxes included
Technological university institute
Utilised agricultural land
European union
Minister of rural development and food
3
January 2014
CONTENTS
1. THE DAIRY CHAIN IN GREECE AND THESSALY ...................................... 6
1.1. THE DAIRY CHAIN IN GREECE .........................................................................................6
1.1.1. Animal feed ....................................................................................................................................... 6
1.1.2. Dairy production: milk, yoghurt, butter and ice cream ...................................................................... 7
1.1.3. Cheese production .......................................................................................................................... 10
1.2. MARKETING SYSTEM AND POLICIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DAIRY CHAIN ............13
1.2.1. Marketing system ............................................................................................................................ 13
1.2.2. Price formation ................................................................................................................................ 15
1.2.3. National development policies of the dairy chain ........................................................................... 16
1.3. THE THESSALY DAIRY CHAIN .......................................................................................18
1.3.1. Position of the territory in the national dairy chain .......................................................................... 18
1.3.2. Dairy farming ................................................................................................................................... 19
1.3.3. Fodder crops ................................................................................................................................... 22
1.3.4. Dairy processing ............................................................................................................................. 25
1.3.5. Large companies in the territory ..................................................................................................... 27
1.3.6. Related industries ........................................................................................................................... 29
2. THESSALY FIELD SURVEY ...................................................................... 32
2.1. SAMPLING AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................32
2.1.1. Sample representativeness ............................................................................................................ 32
2.1.2. Data processing method and results .............................................................................................. 36
2.2. CURRENT STATE OF THE INDUSTRY AND STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR ITS DEVELOPMENT ...36
2.2.1. Summary of survey results ............................................................................................................. 36
2.2.2. Public and private support to the dairy chain .................................................................................. 45
2.2.3. Strengths and weaknesses of the Thessaly dairy chain ................................................................. 49
2.2.4. Priorities proposed by the different actors ...................................................................................... 51
2.3. THE DAIRY CLUSTER PROJECT .....................................................................................54
2.3.1. Opportunity to create a dairy cluster in Thessaly ........................................................................... 54
2.3.2. Priority objectives ............................................................................................................................ 56
2.3.3. Search for a relevant "clustering" process ...................................................................................... 57
2.3.4. Two-phase action plan .................................................................................................................... 58
2.3.5. Resource mobilisation..................................................................................................................... 59
2.3.6. Potential partners ............................................................................................................................ 60
2.3.7. Terms of governance and leadership ............................................................................................. 61
REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 64
4
January 2014
APPENDICES ................................................................................................. 70
APPENDIX 1: SPECIFICATIONS OF THESSALY’S TYPICAL DAIRY PRODUCTS .............................70
General characteristics of Thessaly dairy products .................................................................................. 70
Specification 1 – GRAVIERA AGRAFON (ΓΡΑΒΙΕΡΑ ΑΓΡΑΦΩΝ) PDO ................................................. 71
Specification 2 – FETA (ΦΕΤΑ) PDO ....................................................................................................... 71
Specification 3 – TELEMES (ΤΕΛΕΜΕΣ) PDO ........................................................................................ 72
Specification 4 – ANTHOTYROS (ΑΝΘΟΤΥΡΟ) PDO ............................................................................. 73
Specification 5 – GALOTYRI (ΓΑΛΟΤΥΡI) PDO ...................................................................................... 73
Specification 6 – MANOURI (ΜΑΝΟΥΡI) PDO ......................................................................................... 74
Specification 7 – MIZITHRA (ΜΥΖΗΘΡA) PDO ....................................................................................... 75
Specification 8 – XINOTYRI (ΞΙΝΟΤΥΡI) ................................................................................................. 75
Specification 9 – KEFALOTYRI (ΚΕΦΑΛΟΤΥΡI) PDO ............................................................................ 76
Specification 10 – MPANTZIOS (ΜΠΑΤΖΟΣ) PDO .................................................................................. 76
Specification 11 – TSALAFOUTI (ΤΣΑΛΑΦΟΥΤI) .................................................................................... 77
Specification 12 – NIVATO (NIβATO)....................................................................................................... 77
Specification 13 – YOGHURT (ΓΙΑΟΥΡΤI) ............................................................................................... 78
APPENDIX 2: LIST OF ACTORS AND INSTITUTIONS SURVEYED ................................................79
5
January 2014
1. The dairy chain in Greece and Thessaly
1.1. The dairy chain in Greece
The dairy chain plays an important role in the Greek food industry. The particularity of Greece compared to
other EU countries is the predominance of small ruminants in livestock breeding and the deficit of dairy cow
products (and meat) despite the strong technical modernisation of livestock farms and dairies. Thus, with the
exception of fresh drinking milk, most traditional dairy products (yoghurts, desserts and cheeses) are made from
goat and sheep's milk with iconic products, such as Feta PDO and yoghurt (traditional sheep's milk yoghurt and
drained cow’s milk yoghurt). In recent years, these products have had an increasing demand on foreign markets
(EU, USA and Canada), due to the recognition of their specific quality, their health benefits and their integration
in the Mediterranean diet.
Traditionally, Greece produces a wide range of cheeses (70 are registered, including 21 PDO certified), different
types of yoghurt (traditional and new), creams and other dairy desserts, farmer’s cheese pies and other local
specialties. Regarding cheese, Greek consumers have never lost touch with their national tradition: cheese is
an integral part of the daily diet in the various categories of the population throughout the year (festivals,
regional customs and religious diets). Thus, the economic crisis has not affected the dairy chain significantly
compared to other food and retail dairy chains. Conversely, according to a survey of the retail actors, a new
perspective opens for identity products that better meets the specific price/ quality ratio at a time when
consumers are rationing their food budget.
1.1.1. Animal feed
Animal feed analysis focuses on the sources of production and supply (pasture, fodder and feed concentrates),
the relationship between supply and demand, the distribution channel, and finally, the extension system and
support to farmers.
Animal feed is a key factor in Greece as it represents a significant share of the costs of raw milk production,
estimated at between 60% and 80% depending on the level of intensification of livestock breeding and the
availability of surfaces for certain agricultural self-sufficiency in feed (Tsiboukas K., 2003 and 2006). The power
of the semi-extensive system of small ruminants (low milk yield) is essentially based on rangelands and
relatively little on purchased foods. The semi-intensive system of small ruminants (high milk yield) is itself
essentially practiced in barns with use of feed concentrates and fodder, and self-sufficiency in reduced animal
feed. The situation is even more critical for large, intensive dairy cow breeding (over 100 head) where feeding in
confinement relies almost exclusively on purchased food.
Concerning Greek self-sufficiency in feed, three stages have marked the relationship between agriculture and
breeding in recent decades:

The radical shift from the cultivation of wheat and barley to durum wheat following the accession to the EEC
in 1981 (subsidies) and the phasing out of subsidies for the purchase of grain for animal feed;

The end of production aids and the transition to aid per hectare (MacSharry reform of the CAP);

Decoupling of production aids following the CAP reform of 2003.
Since the introduction of decoupled aids, Greek agriculture has entered a restructuring phase. This latest event,
associated with the parallel development of the dairy chain, marked the entry of agriculture into a new period of
increased fodder production and its convergence with the national demand for animal feed. This offer is growing
rapidly thanks to the agricultural capacities of the plain regions (Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace and Western
Greece), their high level of modernisation (mechanisation and modern irrigation) and the effectiveness of the
extension services. A political incentive for fodder crops has also been established by the Ministry of Rural
Development and Food (MINAGRIC). The development of fodder crops focuses on corn, alfalfa and legumes,
often used as intermediate crops, is partly at the expense of cotton areas. Progress is also significant for silage
techniques and practices. Thus, a tendency to re-territorialise fodder production and livestock breeding is
observed, enhancing the quality and identity of dairy products.
Almost half (47.9%) of the utilised agricultural land (UAL) is used as rangelands (Table 1), while the area
devoted to the cultivation of corn and grain for animal feed does not exceed 8% of the UAL. It should be noted
that the cultivation of wheat has declined in favour of durum wheat, a popular and well-paid agricultural product
on the international market by companies producing pasta and semolina. The production of low-quality wheat,
barley, oats and other grains are used for animal feed. Finally, fodder crops such as alfalfa, vetch hay, etc.
cover 5.1% of the national UAL.
6
January 2014
Table 1: Percentage of Greek agricultural land devoted to animal feed
Crop type
Durum wheat
Spring wheat
Barley
Oats
Other cereals
Corn
Alfalfa
Pasture
Rangelands
Total UAL
Surface (ha)
392,610
139,881
107,559
71,762
41,454
177,943
78,092
210,462
2,705,108
5,647,142
% of the UAL
7.0%
2.5%
1.9%
1.3%
0.7%
3.2%
1.4%
3.7%
47.9%
100.0%
Source: Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) of European Agricultural Aids
Self-sufficient in fodder, Greece imports cereals for animal feed (Table 2), especially inferior quality corn, barley
and wheat. It also imports soybean (its culture is almost non-existent in the country) (Sekliziotis, 2013), of which
20% is used for feeding ruminants. Soybean meal is around 20% of the mixture concentrates for ruminants,
which weighs significantly on feed costs. Faced with the sharp increase in the price of soybean meal in 2012
(0.6€/kg), farmers seek to replace it, at least partially, by cakes produced in the country (cottonseed meal and
sunflower) and leguminous seeds (landraces). In 2012, a pilot project to grow non-GMO soybean was launched
in Eastern Macedonia (Kavala) in light of the diversification of rotations required by the new CAP 2014-2020
(greening).
Table 2: Self-sufficiency in cereals and maize for animal feed in 2011 (million tonnes)
Crop type
Durum wheat
Spring wheat
Barley
Oats
Corn
Production
1,179
403
317
177
2,112
Import
91.77
823.67
176.10
9.15
420.13
Export
338.34
8.13
0.06
0.02
30.76
Consumption
932.43
1,218.54
493.04
186.14
2,501.37
Self-sufficiency rate
126.44%
33.07%
64.29%
95.09%
84.43%
Source: PASEGES, self-sufficiency of food products in Greece, 2012
The majority of animal feed suppliers are farmers-producers of fodder, maize and cereals installed near animal
farms. Retailers, often private veterinary services offices, provide imported feed concentrates (corn, soybean
meal etc.) and minerals. The national industrial production of feed fails to meet the demand: product mixtures
are expensive and farmers have little confidence in their quality. In addition, large farms have their own grain
mills and mixers.
Concerning popularisation, the transition from a public system to a private system complicates the coordination
between research, dissemination and monitoring of breeders. Private services (veterinary services offices) are
also active in the sale of veterinary products (medicines) and feed, which skews their technical advisory
services. Thus, the efficiency of the technical advice needs to be improved.
1.1.2. Dairy production: milk, yoghurt, butter and ice cream
As indicated above, the Greek dairy production in Europe has a unique specificity: the quantity of small ruminant
milk (1.1m tonnes) exceeds that of cow's milk (0.75m) - see Table 3.
Table 3: Evolution of livestock production in Greece between 2001 and 2011
Year
2001
6,923,047
Number of milked sheep
Dairy
682,632
Milk production (tonnes)
sheep
Productivity
per
female
treated
breeding
99
(kg/ head)
3,946,875
Number of milked goats
Dairy
460,208
Milk production (tonnes)
goat
Productivity
per
female
treated
breeding
117
(kg/ head)
215,607
Number of milked cows
Dairy
757,692
Milk
production
(tonnes)
cow
breeding Productivity per female treated
3,514
(kg/ head)
Source: Ministry of Agricultural and Food Development
2003
7,090,799
682,265
2005
6,631,920
676,671
2007
6,696,395
681,359
2009
6,653,312
724,843
2011
6,851,719
744,860
96
102
102
109
109
4,060,980
476,512
3,871,929
443,316
3,768,873
424,921
3,571,729
411,695
3,405,900
383,925
117
114
113
115
113
219,799
768,415
251,358
745,974
214,113
788,322
197,600
755,279
178,268
757,069
3,496
2,968
3,682
3,822
4,247
7
January 2014
Almost all cow's milk is delivered to dairies/ cheese factories (90%) and the majority of sheep’s milk is
processed into cheese (70%). Goat’s milk is less sought by the latter1 (it can represent up to 30% of the milk
used for the manufacture of Feta): in 2008, shipments of goat’s milk decreased by 35% (see Table 4). The rest
of the milk of small ruminants is either self-consumed or used on the farm (cheese and yoghurt).
Table 4: Milk delivered to dairies/ cheese factories (% of milk produced)
Type of milk
Sheep’s milk
Goat’s milk
Cow’s milk
2001
72%
52%
91%
2008
72%
35%
90%
Source: ELSTAT
Greece is highly deficient in products based on cow's milk (Table 5). Domestic production is mainly used as
drinking milk (Tables 6 and 7) although a large part of the UHT milk consumed (which has recently increased at
the expense of fresh pasteurised milk) is also imported.
Table 5: Trade balance of cow's milk, cream and other dairy products,
except yoghurt, butter, ice cream and cheeses (m€)
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import
257
299
294
299
303
349
363
329
338
352
Export
33
37
52
59
63
88
75
71
79
81
Source: ELSTAT
Table 6: Evolution of the apparent consumption of cow's milk from 2000 to 2009 (thousands of tonnes)
Type of milk
Pasteurised fresh milk
Condensed milk
High-pasteurised milk
UHT milk
Total
2000
405
256
47
24
732
2005
508
242
90
21
861
2006
490
244
149
20
903
2007
411
223
196
19
849
2008
397
256
235
23
911
2009
393
252
248
24
917
Source: ICAP Group S.A., market estimates
Table 7: Evolution of apparent consumption (per capita/ year/ kg) of the main dairy products
between 2000 and 2009
Type of milk
Pasteurised fresh milk
Condensed milk
High-pasteurised milk
UHT milk
Yoghurts
2003
44.81
24.86
6.72
1.95
9.21
2004
45.74
23.83
7.7
1.87
8.9
2005
45.84
22.83
8.12
1.89
9.09
2006
44.04
21.93
13.39
1.82
9.17
2007
36.81
19.92
17.54
1.68
8
2008
35.37
22.82
20.97
2.09
8.22
2009
34.88
22.36
22.05
2.11
7.82
Source: ICAP Group S.A., market estimates, ELSTAT
The short term consumption of fresh pasteurised milk (five days, according to the administrative acts of the
Ministry of Commerce in force until mid-2014) led dairies to supply cow’s milk on the domestic market (the short
period of consumption does not allow fresh milk to be imported), which explains the high price charged by the
farmers2. The additional cost of unsold quantities contributes to the relatively high price of fresh milk paid by the
consumer, i.e. between 1.3 and 1.6€ per litre3. Thus, over the past decade, some dairies have turned to the
production of UHT milk. This trend is followed by consumers looking to budget their money by taking advantage
of the lower price of UHT milk and reducing the costs of waste with the ability to store milk for a long time. The
Goat’s milk contains less fat than sheep's milk, which implies additional costs for cheese factories (higher transport costs and storage
compared to sheep's milk).
2
Greece is the fifth most expensive country in the European Union for raw cow's milk.
3
For more details, see the second part of this report on the field survey results.
1
8
January 2014
use of raw milk in the manufacture of products by different processing units and by the farms is presented in
Table 8.
Table 8: Use of raw milk (thousands of tonnes)
Year
2001
2008
Milk, cream, other dairy products
621
698
Different types of yoghurt
120
163
Butter
2
2
Cheese
265
265
Source: ELSTAT
Part of the production of cow's milk, and to a lesser extent sheep and goat’s milk, is used for the manufacture of
yoghurt, both industrial (large dairies) and artisanal (small dairies and farms). Large dairies use mostly
concentrated milk or imported powdered milk for the manufacture of their products. In addition, nearly 15% of
yoghurts and desserts consumed are imported, according to figures from 2009 (Table 9).
Table 9: Evolution of the consumption of yoghurt (tonnes)
Year
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Production*
100,000
108,000
114,500
103,372
102,289
95,453
Import
2,708
8,087
8,801
11,217
13,411
14,565
Export
7,982
15,384
21,291
25,160
23,468
22,015
Apparent consumption**
94,726
100,703
102,010
89,429
92,232
88,003
* Dairy production/ ** Apparent consumption = Production + Import-Export
Source: ELSTAT, ICAP Group S.A. estimates, Ministry of Agricultural and Food Development, Eurostat, ELOGAK
Yoghurt occupies a more and more important place in the Greek dairy chain. During the last decade, large
dairies managed to triple their export of yoghurt with strong growth in demand on the European and the U.S.
dairy markets. Considered beneficial to health and well-being, "Greek" yoghurt has started to be eaten for
breakfast in North America. However, the Greek group FAGE implanted in 2008 a manufacturing yoghurt in the
U.S. to meet the growing demand. Yoghurt is the only Greek dairy product with a positive trade balance (Table
10).
Table 10: Yoghurt trade balance (m€)
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import
30
38
35
49
49
54
49
59
70
71
64
59
Export
28
29
30
35
48
48
57
74
67
60
68
69
Source: ELSTAT
The production of ice cream is also increasing. Dairies import concentrated and powdered cow’s milk for their
production. 20% of ice cream consumption (it depends heavily on tourism flows both at national and regional
level), or about 3.8 kg/ person/ year is imported (Table 11).
9
January 2014
Table 11: Ice cream trade balance (m€)
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import
14
20
18
34
31
31
26
33
38
37
35
35
Export
7
7
5
6
7
7
8
12
14
15
17
13
Source: ELSTAT
Butter consumption is low; the Greeks use plenty of olive oil in their local cuisine. The quantities of butter from
cow's milk consumed are almost all imported (Table 12) and primarily intended for collective catering and
tourism.
Table 12: Evolution of butter consumption (tonnes)
Year
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Production
1,500
1,600
1,700
1,456
1,200
1,200
Import
5,088
10,421
10,016
9,205
10,280
10,429
Export
22
65
47
56
270
59
Apparent consumption
6,566
11,956
11,699
10,605
11,210
11,570
Source: ICAP Group S.A., market estimations
Table 13: Butter trade balance (M €)
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import
23
25
27
30
30
33
34
29
34
39
Export
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.5
0.5
Source: ELSTAT
1.1.3. Cheese production
Cheese is the main product of Greek dairy production and concerns almost exclusively the milk of small
ruminants. Cheese consumption per capita approaches 30 kilos per year, making the Greeks the main cheese
consumers in the world. Based on data from the Greek Statistical Agency (ELSTAT), the average monthly
household expenditure on these products represents approximately 8% of the total monthly expenditure on
food. For Greek consumers, cheese is not a simple dietary supplement, but a staple of the food traditions.
10
January 2014
Map 1: Production of PDO cheeses by town in Greece in 2010
Source: prepared by the authors
In 2011, national cheese production amounted to 287,000 tonnes. Industrial production, booming in recent
years, represented 73.2% of total volume. Farm production contributed in turn to 26.8%, with annual
fluctuations. Compared to other EU countries where direct farm marketing has become an institutionalised form
of marketing (ICAP, 2012), farmers’ markets and direct farm sales are not yet recognised in Greece as
formalised and generalised sales channels. However, the relatively high market share of products that farmers
are able to achieve through informal channels shows the commitment of consumers to local production and trust
in livestock farmers with whom they have established personal ties (subjective criteria of quality and food
safety). More generally, this important part confirms the trend towards "re-territorialisation food and agri-food
systems".
Table 14 shows the strong increase in national dairy production (+19.5%) and export (56.7%) between 2006
and 2011.
11
January 2014
Table 14: Evolution of the consumption of cheese (tonnes)
Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Production
240,100
255,515
265,189
269,065
286,615
287,000
Import
96,811
118,245
112,494
125,015
118,665
113,884
Export
31,280
39,875
41,360
41,654
43,247
49,025
Apparent consumption*
305,631
333,885
336,323
352,426
362,032
351,859
%
2.3%
9.2%
0.7%
4.8%
2.7%
-2.8%
* Apparent consumption = Production + Import-Export
Source: ELSTAT, ICAP Group S.A. estimates, Ministry of Agricultural and Food Development, Eurostat, ELOGAK
Import increased between 2006 and 2009 (29.1%) and declined after 2009 (-8.9%), but remained at relatively
high levels: 32.4% of total consumption. A significant share of import is intended for collective restaurants and
delicatessens.
Table 15: Cheese and curd trade balance (m€)
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import
304
294
310
338
346
381
403
364
388
405
Export
132
119
131
138
155
176
199
204
221
238
Source: ELSTAT
Imported cheeses (mainly processed cheese or cheddar) are used in baking or as a cooking ingredient (ICAP,
2011)4.
Export of Greek cheeses is significant: about 17% of national production in 2011. Feta PDO is the main Greek
cheese exported. The final achievement of the Feta PDO by Greece in 20055 has contributed to significant
growth in the production of Feta as well as sheep’s milk (see Table 3). More broadly, recording 20 Greek
cheeses as PDO products have played an important role in the penetration of these products in international
markets. Recognition of their distinctive quality in this certification has allowed them to be valued at a higher
price on the market (premium price) in a fair, competitive environment. Previously, Greek Feta was subject to
fierce, and often unfair, competition from white “Feta” type cheeses from Northwest European countries.
On the Greek market, a wide variety of national and/ or imported products is sold cut and packaged. Feta
accounts for over 40% of the cheese consumption in Greece. It is a staple food, with multiple flavours and
organoleptic characteristics that satisfy all tastes. Feta accompanies every meal, served only at the end or used
as an ingredient in traditional dishes, including appetizers (Saganaki and meatballs) and cheese puffs (pita).
More generally, soft cheeses represent the bulk of national cheese production (65-70%). Hard and semi-hard
cheese holds a weaker position in the order of 20% followed by "processed cheese" (13% -15%).
ICAP (2011), annual report on the "Situation and prospects of SMEs in Greece”.
In 1996, the EU recognised Feta as a PDO product of Greece and provided for an adjustment period of five years for the other member
states that produced “Feta” type cheeses (based on cow's milk). The same year, Germany, Denmark and France had recourse to the
European Court against the decision of the Commission, arguing that Feta is a "generic" product, which involves basic processes found in
all Balkan countries under different denominations. In 1999, the European Court, challenging the legality of the award process of Feta PDO
to Greek producers, cancelled the issuance of this appellation. Under the new 1070/99 regulation, Feta has been removed from the list of
European PDOs. After new approaches on the Greek side, it was decided in 2003 to renew the Greek Feta PDO label (Regulation
1829/2002). The main arguments in favour of “Greek” Feta were that Feta has been produced in Greece since antiquity (according to
historical sources) from sheep and goat’s milk and according to the perceptions of European consumers, Feta is associated with Greece,
Feta manufacturing processes were codified in Greece much earlier than abroad, and production of Greek Feta covers more than 60% of
the total cheese production in Greece (80% of total production of cheese from sheep and goat's milk), which shows the close relationship of
the Greek territory and Feta in its natural and cultural environment (predominantly mountainous areas and semi-arid rocky mountains,
considered a symbol of Greece by the Greeks). Shortly after the second issuance of the Feta PDO to Greece, German and Danish
governments and German, Danish and French producers’ organisations had recourse to the Tribunal of the European Community against
the Regulation 1829/02. The Court ruled in 2005 in favour of certification of the designation of Greek origin. Dairy industries producing Feta
type cheeses of member countries of the EU had a transitional period up until 2007 to completely eliminate the word “Feta” from their
labelling.
4
5
12
January 2014
Regarding distribution, 75% of sales (national and imported) are made at the fresh products counter as cut and
packaged cheese6. For national cheeses, the percentage rises to 89%. Nevertheless, there is a gradual shift
towards packaged products, despite the fact that the price per kilogramme is relatively high: the rhythms of
modern life encourage consumers to buy refrigerated and pre-packaged supermarket products rather than
queue up in their local cheese shop.
In summary, between national and imported products, the consumer chooses first Greek cheeses from his
country (more than two thirds of consumption) for consumption at the table, and second, imported products
(cheaper) for cooking, baking, and preparing toast. Greek cheeses are "anchored" in food traditions. Consumers
select cheeses that offer high-added value (heritage, Belletti & Marescotti, 2009) in terms of taste and the wider
organoleptic characteristics (odour, texture and colour) of the region of production, and quality. The price is the
last criteria taken into account, according to the head of the cheese counter in the supermarket chain
investigated.
The socio-economic crisis has led households to ration their food budget and encourages a "rapid Hellenization
of the food basket". With the support of the national consumer market and the protection of jobs, new
opportunities are opening up for Greek SMEs as they offer high quality and original favours in their cheeses
(AGROTERRA, 2013). "The Greek turning point" concerning consumption is confirmed by the ICAP sectoral
report of cheeses in 2009, which notes that the demand for cheese is more related to the type of cheese and
the region of origin rather than commercial brands.
However, the growth in sales of packaged and pre-packaged products had led to the emergence of a demand
for "recognised brands" that the consumer seeks on the supermarket shelves. Therefore, large dairy companies
spend significant sums to promote their PDO product brands and play on the cultural heritage by highlighting
images of mountain pastures, pastoral livestock and traditional cheese-making techniques. Advertising has a
significant influence on the demand by attracting consumers to targeted commercial logos or towards new types
of products. This is confirmed by customers of supermarket chains. More specifically, information leaflets are
placed in stores to inform consumers about the quality and nutritional characteristics of traditional Greek dairy
products and the PDO certification while the advertising industry groups focus on the support offered to Greek
producers, including small producers (ICAP, 2012).
Recently, more and more companies offer low-fat cheeses. Technological developments and improvements in
production facilitate the satisfaction of various applications (light cheeses, specialty cheeses made from
vegetable fat, soybean Lenten cheese, etc.).
Sales of organic cheeses are also experiencing strong growth, mainly Feta and fine cheeses with high-added
value and cheeses for niche markets termed "gourmet". Although their future is uncertain due to the economic
crisis, these niche markets are dairy chains with high growth potential.
1.2. Marketing system and policies for the development of the dairy chain
1.2.1. Marketing system
The marketing system for dairy products is characterised by the dominance of a few large wholesalers (flow of
national production and import) and supermarket chains in the retail trade (10 amongst them are national).
Thus, the market works in oligopolistic conditions at the expense of both producers (farmers and SME
processors) and consumers. Denunciation in 2007 of the cartels governing the dairy market has brought the
situation to light7. In 2005, after complaints by an association of dairy farmers in northern Greece, the National
Competition Commission discovered an illegal agreement between eight large industrial dairies and nine
supermarket chains to lower the price of milk paid to producers and maintain more generally, commodity prices
at low levels while increasing final prices paid by consumers.
The size and level of organisation of processing units (dairies) determine how their products are distributed on
the national market. Large dairies are both producers and importers of certain milk products in order to diversify
their portfolio (including yoghurts and dairy desserts); they market their products primarily through their own
networks and use their own transport. A portion of their goods nevertheless channelled through local
representatives and wholesalers. The enterprise network covers almost the entire Greek territory while local
representatives serve remote distribution centres and warehouses (Georgakopoulos, 2012).
Smaller-sized companies usually collaborate with networks of representatives, intermediaries and wholesalers,
but some sell their products directly to the local and regional market (mini-markets, dairies, restaurants) or sell
directly to cheese shops.
6
7
Packaged products in Greece appeared only two decades ago.
http://www.tovima.gr/finance/article/?aid=179611
13
January 2014
Regarding export, including Feta and "Greek" yoghurt (drained cow’s milk yoghurt), large industrial groups such
as FAGE, VIVARTIA and OLYMPOS (Thessaly) market their products through importers and distributors of
Greek food products abroad. It is interesting to note that small and medium-sized dairies are mobilising to find
opportunities abroad based on their relations and family networks (international food fairs, knowledge networks,
the Greek diaspora communities, etc.) failing the consortium to promote specialty products with a designation of
origin (regional or national).
Thus, although some products are highly appreciated in foreign markets and are regarded as a central element
of the Mediterranean diet, farmers and processors struggle to capture a greater share of the value created in the
international value chain by lack of a strategy to promote the specific collective attributes of these products. The
field survey conducted in Thessaly with processors confirmed the trend of Greek companies to turn towards
export because of the shrinking of the national market due to the fall in the purchasing power of consumers and
adjustment measures. It is certain that large, unobstructed profits throughout the value chain could help
producers return to the territory, especially in Thessaly.
The distribution channels of dairy products can be distributed as follows:

Wholesale
Large dairy groups usually agree and sell directly to large supermarket chains and large retail groups abroad
without going through wholesalers. In the dairy chain, three to four large dairy groups cover 90% of sales in
Greece.
Cheese wholesalers covering the entire national territory through retail networks are also importers of foreign
cheeses. The majority of dairy export (yoghurts, desserts) and cheese (mainly Feta) are exported through
subsidiaries of large Greek food companies located in the U.S., Canada, UK, Italy, Germany and the
Netherlands.

Retail and distribution network
Supermarkets have experienced rapid development and now make the majority of the total sales. This
development has led the dairy and cheese industries to turn towards packaging to adapt to the new market
trends. In fact, retailing has undergone significant restructuring in the 1990s with supermarket takeovers and
mergers and the entry of multinational giants in the Greek groups’ equity.
Outside the major supermarket chains, there are also convenience store chains selling traditional, local food in
large urban centres (such as Critica Crete, Naxos Naxiotika and Mytilinia Mytilene, named after their region of
origin), shops specialised in traditional Greek products (delicatessens) and shops selling organic products.
Finally, some small outlets such as dairies, bakeries, kiosks, service stations, etc. hold a significant proportion of
the sale of dairy products for daily consumption (fresh milk, yoghurt, desserts and small-packaged Feta).
Cheese SMEs seek markets in the country and abroad through personal contact, usually without any particular
promotion strategy.

Local, regional and national informal distribution networks
These networks are based on personal relationships between farmers and cheesemakers on the tourist markets
and nearby networks of compatriots in major cities. They represent approximately 25% of the cheese production
of farms.

Tourism market and other professional channels
This is basically commercial catering areas (restaurants, taverns, hotels and pastry shops) and food service
companies (catering). These markets are particularly important for small and medium-sized production units in
tourist areas.
In conclusion, it appears that the dairy and cheese companies, regardless of size, act individually in the
absence of a coherent strategy for the promotion of the special identity and profile of dairy products (Feta,
Kaseri and Greek yoghurt) and their area of origin supported by a professional partnership or regional and
national actors. This lack of a common strategy results in a loss of added value for producers and territories and
an accumulation of economic spin-offs related to improving the image of the typical products (Feta, Greek
yoghurt, etc.) and quality associated with the origin (Feta Kalavryton or Ladotyri Mytilinis PDO) downstream of
the dairy chain (trade).
At the institutional level, an effective framework is lacking to encourage entrepreneurial spirit of SMEs and
develop processing units (increased export). The conclusion of the study "A Trade Promotion Strategy for
Greece", made in 2013 on behalf of the Greek government, stated the major obstacles in the area of trade and
export promotion including:
14
January 2014

Administrative barriers to export;

Lack of effective support of marketing strategies;

Low share of export, which does not allow Greek SMEs access to foreign markets;

Promotion actions that target smaller markets without considering the strategic issues;

Lack of coordination between the relevant departments;

Lack of a unified trade policy at the national level (branding);

Lack of economic diplomacy8.
1.2.2. Price formation
Milk prices in Greece, for raw material for processing units as well as the consumer product (fresh pasteurised
milk), is amongst the highest in the EU (Table 21). Raw milk from Greek cows is the most expensive after that of
Cyprus, Malta, Italy and Finland (according to Eurostat). For sheep’s milk, Greece ranks third after Portugal and
France. Finally, the price of goat’s milk is the highest in the EU (Vallerand F., Dubeuf J.P., Tsiboukas K., 2007).
Table 16: Evolution of the price of cow, goat and sheep’s milk, and Feta between 2002 and 2011 (€/ kg)
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Cow’s milk
0.34
0.35
0.35
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.41
0.42
0.37
0.42
Goat's milk
0.50
0.50
0.52
0.54
0.55
0.51
0.56
0.58
0.58
0.56
Sheep's milk
0.82
0.85
0.88
0.90
0.92
0.87
0.94
0.96
0.97
0.95
Feta
4.23
4.31
4.97
4.70
4.83
4.71
5.06
Source: ELOGAK and Ministry of Rural Development and Food
Several institutional, structural and organisational factors generate weaknesses and distortions in the market at
the expense of producers (farmers and processors) and regions producing identity products. In the absence of
collective arrangements for the negotiation of farm prices (lack of co-operatives, farmers’ groups and interprofessional union of the dairy chain), the price and time of milk collection are fixed as a result of individual
negotiations between farmers and processors. The use of formal contracts is nearly universal in the case of
cow's milk, while for milk from small ruminants, economic and financial relations are based primarily on oral
agreements. Another shortcoming of the price formation system is that the farm price of milk from small
ruminants does not vary according to the quality (application of a single price), except for some cheeses that
take into account the casein content.
Thus, the seasonality of milk production (six months) and the relatively low price of Feta are constraints for
cheese development given the low profits generated by processing activities. In 2012, the cost of raw material to
produce one kilo of Feta (4 litres of sheep’s milk) was about 4 € while the price of wholesale was around 5.20 €
ex. taxes and the retail price in supermarkets9 for a kilo of unpackaged bulk Feta was around 7.50 €. Thus, the
value created seems to focus on both ends of the chain: milk producers upstream and distributors and retailers
downstream. In the middle, processors make very small profits (Vakoufaris H., 2010). However, with regards to
farmers, it is important to note that 60% to 80% of the costs of producing milk are related to feed costs, and due
to the lack of fodder resources. The majority of revenue from milk production thus amounts to feed suppliers in
different ways, whether they are farmers, traders and transporters. Thus, despite low growth between 2002 and
2012 (Table 16), the price of Feta and other cheeses made from sheep and goat's milk is used only to
reimburse the production costs. The consumer price of Greek cheese is often even lower than many cheeses
from imported cow's milk.
Fieldwork in Thessaly has revealed that small and medium processing units that sell their products in local and
regional markets through their own contacts and through loyal customers obtain higher profits than that of the
national market through networks of wholesalers and large retail chains. A more territorial marketing strategy
allows SMEs to better use their PDO products (strict specifications on the quality of the raw materials) and
8
9
http://news.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_economy_2_04/05/2013_519475
Traditional packaging of Feta is in 60 kg wooden barrels or 16 kg steel drums. In retail, the cheese is sold in bulk.
15
January 2014
withstand competition from large units that benefit from economies of scale through the specific quality of their
products.
1.2.3. National development policies of the dairy chain
Development policies (rural development programme, investment laws, the French national strategic reference
framework - CRSN through its sectoral and regional programmes) related to the dairy chain are part of the EU
policies and especially the second pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy ("Baltatzis" rural development
programme - RDP), and have funding for both primary production and processing. The programme aims to
improve the competitiveness of agriculture, environment and landscape, the quality of life in rural areas and
diversification of the rural economy. The "Baltatzis" RDP is the main engine of the Greek agricultural
development mainly for funding the modernisation of production units at the various levels of the supply chain
and improving the environment of these units.
MODERNISATION OF PRODUCTION UNITS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE DAIRY CHAIN

Modernisation of livestock farms
Restricted improvement plans for livestock operations, provided for by measure 121 of the RDP, funds the
construction of new barns and storage facilities and the purchase of mechanical equipment (milking machines,
milk cooling tanks, oil electric generators, labs for the preparation of fodders, small systems for the biological
treatment of wastewaters, weighing scales, grinders, mixers, grain silos, tractors and tractor/ towing tools).
Considered complex and highly bureaucratic, traditional farm improvement projects were not very attractive
(4,100 applications approved nationally), while funding for restricted improvement plans for livestock farms are
considered more flexible, functional and effective. Indeed, they do not require prior authorisation, are not subject
to the bureaucracy and therefore are not delayed. Although the application process has been simplified, the lack
of liquidity of farmers has hindered the provision of funding. Many large farms (> 1,000 head) took the
opportunity to use these grants to partially fund their facilities and equipment, the total cost often exceeded
250,000€ (maximum funding of the improvement plans).

Creation, modernisation and relocation of dairies and cheese
The new investment law (3908/2011) and measure 123A of the RDP encourage investment in processing and
marketing of agricultural products 10. The funding provided was used by both dairy companies (thus reinforcing
the production of milk and dairy products) and by production and fodder marketing companies. The two
programmes have substantially contributed to the modernisation of the dairy chain, although the implementation
of the second is hampered by bureaucracy and slow implementation (late payments). In areas of application of
the LEADER and OPAACH programmes (integrated programmes for the development of the PIDER rural
space), integration in the context of funding investment projects in dairy processing has contributed to the
modernisation of traditional units. These investments have effectively solved the problems of safety and
certification of products, thus increasing the competitiveness of the recipient units.

Creation and modernisation of small industrial/ domestic artisanal units
These units are part of the industry because they process/ promote milk for the production of other products.
Funding under measures 311 and 313 (Area 3 of the RDP) are generally used in addition to the benefits granted
by the Investment Act. These units also call for funding under measure 312 (Area 3 of the RDP) for their
networking.

Promotion of dairy products
Promotion of dairy products so far has been scattered and random. It is organised centrally or regionally without
any specific purpose. The current economic crisis promotes better organisation of this type of action. Better
planning is still necessary to improve the effectiveness of these interventions.

Entrepreneurship and the organisation of producers
Measure 133 concerns the actions to improve the operation of production units (breeding, processing), the
organisation of producers and promote entrepreneurship.
10
Since 2000, 180 investment projects were completed (the amount of public expenditure is 50% of the budget) including 27 in Thessaly.
For the period 2000-2006, the average amount of investment reached 1,473 € (3,373 € in Thessaly), while for the period 2007-2013, it was
820 € (1,092 € in Thessaly).
16
January 2014
IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT PRODUCTION UNITS
Under the previous programmes, the RDP provided funding for the improvement of milk production, but these
measures have faced many difficulties in implementation due to the following structural problems:

Ageing population of livestock farmers
The population of livestock farmers could be rejuvenated by applying measures 112 (incentives for young
farmers) and 113 (early retirement) of the RDP.

Lack of training and information
As the implementation of measure 111 of the RDP (vocational training and information) was ineffective, it was
abolished.

Difficult conditions for practising livestock farming
Livestock activities were supported in terms of revenue through the implementation of measures 211, 212
(compensatory indemnities) and 214 (Action 1.3: Specific incentives for diversification of farms).

Management and maintenance of pastures
The application of measure 125 (action 4) concerning the improvement of pastures was ineffective. A state of
the project, the funding planned seemed to provide solutions to the major problems of management and pasture
maintenance (lack of shelter, herdsman housing, livestock breeders’ pathways, drinking troughs, rainwater
reservoirs, fencing and small technical jobs). A series of obstacles prevented them from obtaining the expected
results including the overlap of responsibilities between the departments of rural development and forest
inspection, poorly defined ownership, the undefined use of pastures and the low budget of the measure with
respect to the extent of the pasture land.

Rural roads
Rural roads were renovated (openings, bridges, earthworks, paving and cementing) in the context of measure
125A of the RDP with obvious results since all livestock facilities are now connected to the roads.

Rural electrification
Meanwhile, measure 125 (action 3) could have allowed sheepfolds access to a direct, continuous electrical
connection and without any obstacles, but the budget for this measure was not sufficient given the extent of the
needs in many parts of the country.

Risk of extinction of certain animal breeds and agricultural resources
Grouping, under measure 214 of actions 1.3 (livestock diversification), 3.1 (preservation of indigenous
endangered animal breeds) and 3.4 (protection of agricultural genetic resources), enhances the activity of
farming and contributes to the protection of Feta and all PDO dairy products. The proper application of this
measure is still hampered by bureaucratic problems, late payments (and delays in general), the discontinuity
between programming periods and low funding.

Weak development of the organic dairy chain
The transition from conventional to organic livestock farming has been supported by actions 1.1 (organic
farming) and 1.2 (organic livestock farming) of measure 214 of the RDP. Funding provided satisfactory covers of
income losses that usually accompany this transition. However, the lack of coordination in the implementation
and promotion of these actions on each territory has created many problems. Moreover, the low penetration of
organic dairy products on the market and the significant price differential between conventional and organic
products remain major problems. In this sense, measure 132 of the RDP promotes the implementation of
control systems for food quality, livestock activities or the processing company.
In addition to these funds, the National Fund for Entrepreneurship and Development (ETEAN) contributes to the
improvement of the liquidity of small businesses with actions such as the "entrepreneurship fund", which
provides loans mainly for export, and the "rural entrepreneurship fund ", which provides loans to rural
companies.
In addition, under the "national contingency reserve" programme, a tender was launched to train 8,500
unemployed youths on issues concerning rural economy, with a budget of € 2 million.
Lastly, the "development of human potential" programme provided training, reformation and support for the rural
population (in terms of diversification, competitiveness, innovation, cooperation, information, green economy,
etc.).
17
January 2014
1.3. The Thessaly dairy chain
1.3.1. Position of the territory in the national dairy chain
The Thessaly region, located in the centre-east of mainland Greece, has an area of 14,037 km2 (50% of plains)
and a population of 730,730 inhabitants, with a density of 52.06 people per km 2. The plain of Thessaly, the
largest in Greece, is completely surrounded by the Olympus, Antihassia, Pindus, Orthrys, Pelion and Ossa
mountains (Map 2). Thessaly has identified 76,503 farms (crops and livestock), against 803,000 in Greece
(9.5% of farms in the country).
Map 2: Geographical features of the Thessaly region
The geographical concentration of the dairy herd within the region (Map 3) corresponds almost exactly to the
distribution of extensive mountain pastures (Map 4). This strong correlation between the location of herds and
pastures shows the central role of grazing in the Thessaly ruminant breeding system. In the plain, there is a high
overload on the pasture in several places because of the high density of ruminants per hectare due to lack of
pasture.
Thessaly has a great tradition of manufacturing cheese, including Feta. This tradition is related to the fact that
much of its farmers and cheesemakers are nomadic or semi-nomadic (Sarakatsanes, Vlachs, etc.) and only
settled in the 1960s. Meanwhile, all farms practiced mixed farming (dairy sheep and cows) in the region until the
1970s.
18
January 2014
Table 17: Structure of ruminant livestock in Thessaly as part of OTEX* (2011)
OTEX
Sheep
Goats
Cattle
Mixed
breeding
Cropsbreeding
Number of farms
Age of head
Economic size (UDE)
UAL (ha)
Cereals (ha)
Maize (ha)
Alfalfa (ha)
Other hay production (ha)
Pastures (ha)
Dairy cows (head)
Other cattle (head)
Sheep - reproductive females (head)
Goats - reproductive females (head)
2,465
50
20.53
32.35
0.97
0.06
0.08
0.31
30.66
0
0.09
191.23
5.03
1,156
51
20.25
38.05
0.59
0.05
0.05
0.25
36.87
0
0.09
1.65
166.62
1,544
47
70.43
96.5
1.37
0.53
0.22
0.86
92.94
9.39
68.97
9.67
5.27
653
51
24.85
31.47
2.68
0.41
0.33
1.09
23.82
0.1
1.83
77.84
22.26
1,628
52
17.84
17.53
2.71
1.21
0.69
1.51
9.67
0.01
0.73
49.27
6.34
Mixed
ruminants
breeding
2,727
52
22.51
49.58
1.65
0.31
0.23
0.83
45.86
0.09
1.12
112.93
45.71
Total
10,173
51
28.45
457.030
15.834
4.114
2.565
7.834
418,061
14,834
112,237
927,212
362,664
* Technico-economic orientation of farming
1.3.2. Dairy farming
THE HERD
By applying the typology of the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) to the data of the integrated
administration and control system (IACS) of European agricultural aid, there are 10,173 farms specialising in
ruminant livestock in Thessaly. Table 18 shows, for each OTEX, the average farm structure.
Table 18: Number of sheep, goat and cattle farms by herd size in Thessaly
No. of units
Number of sheep farms by herd size
Number of goat farms by herd size
Number of cattle farms by herd size
1-5
51-150
151-350
351-700
700-1,500
1,500-2,000
>2,000
Total
1-50,
51-150
151-350
351-700
700-1,500
1,500-2,000
>2,000
Total
1-7
8-20
21-50
51-100
101-200
201-300
>300
Total
Year
2011
4,957
2,077
2,100
530
25
1
0
9,690
4,228
1,668
925
317
29
2
1
7,170
753
294
404
503
279
52
18
2,303
19
1997
6,309
2,840
1,900
182
5
0
0
11,236
5,156
807
812
186
11
0
0
6,972
1,344
242
234
74
13
1
1,908
January 2014
During the recent period, these three types of livestock showed different trends:

Sheep breeding
Between 2001 and 2011, the number of milked females was maintained and female productivity increased by
10% while the number of farms fell sharply (-27%) during the period 1997-2011 (Table 18). Small and medium
semi-extensive farming11 (1-50 and 51-150 head) was particularly affected due to changes in the CAP European
aid system after 2005 (from a grant per head to a single payment per farm). On the other hand, the number of
large herds (151-350 and 351-700 head) increased in response to the growing demand for sheep’s milk by
dairies following the definitive award of the Feta PDO to Greece by the EU. This is recent investments in semiintensive and intensive farms (barn feeding) of breeds with high milk productivity (Chios, Karagouniko and, to a
lesser extent, Frisarta) with a mechanised milking system.

Goat breeding
Goat farming is declining both in terms of number of milked females, milk productivity per capita and the number
of farms (-41%) between 1997 and 2011 (Table 18). This fall has particularly affected very small herds (1-50
head) due to changes to the CAP and the low demand for goat’s milk. It concerns generally extensive farms of
local breeds with low milk productivity, with a diet based on the bush land pastures, a hand milking system and
rudimentary barns.

Cattle breeding
Cattle breeding, which was progressively integrated into the dairy chain from the 1980s, experienced a sharp
decline in the number of dairy cows (-17%) and a parallel increase in the yield (21%). The number of small
farms (< 20 cows) decreased significantly due to the pressure of large dairy groups on farms to bring them to
enlarge their size and increase their production in order to minimize the cost of milk collection. However, this
selective policy does not cover the national quota of cow's milk (832,000 tonnes against a production of around
750,000 tonnes). As the breeding system of dairy cows is intensive, only one breed is used (Holstein
international breed) and machine milking is widespread. Feeding is done in the barn with a mixture of corn
silage and concentrates.
Thus, farms are oriented either towards a "monoculture" logic with an intensive farming system based on a
single animal breed or towards a mixed activity (crop-livestock, mixed ruminant livestock and mixed farming),
with a more extensive system and different animal types, of which the choice is determined by the quality of the
pastures used (bush land, etc..).
Comparison between Thessaly’s percentage of these three types of dairy females in the national herd and the
total national farms shows that the average sheep and cow herd size in the region is higher than the national
average. Indeed, the number of sheep in Thessaly represents 14% of the national herd and the number of
sheep farms in Thessaly represents only 11% of the total national farms. Similarly, the relative percentage of
cows shows a positive difference between the number of head (17%) and the number of farms (12%).
Table 19: Number of dairy cows in Thessaly and share in the national herd in 2011
Type of animals
Number of animals (head)
958,872
368,778
14,854
Reproductive female sheep
Reproductive female goats
Dairy cows
Percentage of the Thessaly in the
national herd
14%
10%
17%
Table 20: Number of dairy farms in Thessaly and percentage in the national total in 2011
Thessaly
Greece
% Thessaly/ Greece
Sheep farms
9,690
88,719
11%
Goat farms
7,170
70,335
10%
Cow and heifer farms
2,303
19,194
12%
During the recent period, Thessaly has indeed become an important dairy area for Greek dairy groups,
especially due to the local production of feed, which was developed after the entry into force of the CAP in
2005, and the decoupling of aids that favoured the substitution of corn and alfalfa crops for irrigated cotton
areas. Thus, the role of livestock in the region, as throughout Greece, tends to grow stronger.
11
These farms are characterised by a diet based primarily on grazing in rangelands (2.7 million ha in Greece) during the period from March
to November, breeding in often rudimentary buildings and manual processes.
20
January 2014
DAIRY PRODUCTION
Between 2005 and 2010, gross milk production in the primary dairy chain has increased in Thessaly while
gross agricultural production has decreased, resulting in an increase in the proportion of milk in the formation of
regional agricultural GDP, which increased from 8% to 10% (Table 21). This positive trend is confirmed by the
data in Table 22.
Table 21: Gross production of raw milk production in Thessaly (M €)
Year
Gross milk production
Gross agriculture production
2005
2010
143.12
161.39
1750.19
1613.52
% raw milk production/
total agriculture
8%
10%
Source: ELSTAT
Table 22: Gross production of dairy processing* in Thessaly (M €)
Year
2002
2005
2010
Gross production of dairy
processing
143.26
242.05
313.96
Gross production of
agribusiness
564.39
656.60
669.31
% dairy processing/
food industry
25%
37%
47%
* Processing units with more than 10 employees
Source: ELSTAT

Sheep and goat’s milk production
At regional level, sheep and goat farming contributes to 58.6% of the total gross value of livestock production.
Thessaly produces 104,132 tonnes of sheep’s milk and 40,011 tonnes of goat’s milk, 18.8% and 20.3%,
respectively, of the national production. It also produces more than 30% of the national Feta, which uses 85%
of sheep and goat’s milk produced locally. The 75 dairy farms/ cheese factories in Thessaly collect 94,560
tonnes of sheep’s milk (64% from the Larissa regional unit) and 24,983 tonnes of goat’s milk (63% from
Larissa). The total milk production of small ruminants, 90% of sheep’s milk and 62% goat’s milk, are processed
by the institutions of Thessaly; the rest is used on the farm (or consumed as fresh milk). Larissa is the first
Greek regional unit for delivery of sheep's milk (11% of deliveries in the country) and the third for goat’s milk
(10%).

Cow’s milk production
The concentration of dairy cow farms is significant in Thessaly (17.5% of the whole country). According to
ELOGAK data in 2009 (Table 23), the Larissa regional unit alone accounts for 64.6% of these farms, which
produce nearly 10% of the national production of cow's milk.
Table 23: Dairy cow breeders in Thessaly (2009)
Regional units (exdepartment)
Larissa
Trikala
Karditsa
Magnesia
Thessaly
Greece
Dairy cows
19,000
4,728
3,302
2,397
29,427
149,000
Milk production
(tonnes)
65,000
18,216
7,800
6,726
97,220
670,000
Source: Department of Rural Development of the Thessaly Region
Given the degree of openness of Greece and Thessaly’s contribution to national production, the dairy chain has
significant development opportunities. All cow's milk produced in Thessaly is processed, with the exception of a
small amount corresponding to the producers’ personal consumption. Milk is delivered to large dairy industries
such as DELTA, FAGE, OLYMPOS, EVOL and TRIKKI and small Thessaly dairy companies, which mainly
produce pasteurised fresh milk as well as dairy products, such as cheese, yoghurt, cream etc.
21
January 2014
1.3.3. Fodder crops
The UAL in Thessaly is 861,000 ha, or 15% of the national UAL. 50% of the area is devoted to rangelands; they
are located mainly in mountainous and semi-mountainous areas (Map 3), the agricultural area in the plain being
mainly devoted to crops.
Map 3: Pasture area (ha) and its percentage of the common UAL
Almost all of the pastures in Thessaly are publicly communal and collective owned (joint ownership by the state
and the municipalities). This land tenure and strict forest laws explain the major problem of the pasture
demarcation faced by farmers. This results in conflicts between the forest service and the latter, especially for
goat breeding.
OVER-EXPLOITED PASTURES
Over-exploitation observed in plain is due to the narrow surfaces of the pastures in this area. Dairy farming is
highly intensive; this over-exploitation is mainly due to the weight and density of extensive sheep and goat
farming.
22
January 2014
Map 4: Distribution of the area of pasture and dairy females (in LSU*) in 2010
* Livestock unit
Thus, the load on the rangelands12 is about 1 LSU/ ha for all OTEX animals. These are therefore highly
dependent on the market for animal feed13.
This problem could be solved by the recovery of old pastures and by the creation of artificial grassland
(irrigated) on communal pastures. These old pastures have been cleared and are available for lease to farmers
following the decline of plain farming in the 1970s to 1980s. In semi-mountainous areas, old pastures cleared in
the 1960s gave increasingly poor yields due slopes, leaching, depletion and soil erosion. The sharp decline in
yields and reduction from 2014 of the gap between aid for cultivated areas and grazing areas should encourage
the transformation of these surfaces into pastures. In the plain, increasing herd sizes have already pushed
farmers to demand the reinstatement of the land to the previous use. Finally, the new law governing the Deme
activities (basic local government) provides the implementation of improvement projects and the creation of
artificial pasture on communal pastures.
FODDER CROPS
Table 24 shows that 32% of the area devoted to "other cereals" in Greece are in Thessaly, while 16% of corn,
14% of alfalfa and 15% of other crops for hay production are located in the region.
12
Most pastures are owned by the state; their management was entrusted to the municipalities who rent to local farmers at low prices.
Dairy cow feed in practice is stable throughout the year, while for small ruminants, feeds are mainly used during the winter months
(November to March).
13
23
January 2014
Table 24: Distribution of the UAL in Thessaly (2011)
Type of crop
Spring wheat
Durum wheat
Rice
Other cereals (for animal consumption)
Corn (irrigated)
Alfalfa
Other crops for hay production
Tobacco
Cotton
Industrial tomatoes
Rangelands
Total UAL
Surface area
(ha)
15,977
104,132
8
36,143
28,152
11,065
30,567
1,636
118,992
2,033
429,251
860,757
% of the UAL in
Thessaly
1.86%
12.10%
4.20%
3.3%
1.3%
3.6%
0.2%
13.8%
0.2%
49.9%
100%
% of surface area in
Greece
11%
27%
32%
16%
14%
15%
11%
39%
51%
16%
15%
Map 5 shows the distribution of crops for the production of feed in Thessaly by town (2011). The development of
fodder crops generally follows the request of local farms for animal feed. Organic farming is underdeveloped in
Thessaly; the presence of organic fodder crops is still low. Agriculture in Thessaly, its good level of
modernisation and in particular, its irrigation system, is able to meet the increased needs for fodder, both in
quantity and quality. As part of restructuring of the agricultural dairy chain, there is an integration of corn, alfalfa
and other traditional and native crops in the rotation systems. This trend is fostered by the demand for fodder by
farms in the region and by the presence of more than 70 feed production units. Some of these are installed in
small agricultural centres in the region and have direct relationships with producers.
Map 5: Area devoted to crops for animal feed production in Thessaly (2011)
Meanwhile, we are witnessing the consolidation of fodder producers, with the best example of THES-GI
(Thessaly land), which includes more than 1,000 producers and cooperates with cooperative dairy farmers
whose milk production reaches 150 tonnes per day.
24
January 2014
Faced with the serious concerns of the dairy chain actors in terms of the quality and cost of food, meetings and
information seminars are held on these issues throughout Greece, including Thessaly. Thus, in 2012, the
farmers' cooperative dairy THESGALΑ organised a seminar in Larissa on the topic: "Soybean and legume crops
in Greece: application methods in ruminant feeding". In the same period, a seminar of the branch of the
cooperative union division of the Trikala regional unit specialising in feed production (AGROVIZ), focused on the
soybean crop.
The strength of the fodder supply in Thessaly is based not only on its ability to meet the growing demand in
quantity, but also in quality (protein) and its successful integration into each small farm. Fodder production still
suffers from poor information services, lack of farmer training and also a mechanism to support and monitor the
use of food and adapt the ration to the needs of the herds. The absence of such a mechanism complicates
cooperation between research centres and farmers, and the production of specific qualities of feed products in
Thessaly, which hinders the improvement of milk yield and the dairy product quality.
1.3.4. Dairy processing
Dairy processing in Thessaly is characterised by the maintenance of traditional cheese production transmitted
from generation to generation by the active and close relations between farmers’ networks and by the presence
of cheese factories in small territories; this promotes the resilience of the dairy chain, particularly in times of
crisis. The strong dairy tradition is reflected in the local cuisine (cheese puffs) and extends the possibilities of
synergies between dairy chains and territorial anchoring of the added value.
Dairy products traditionally made in Thessaly are:

Fresh organic and non-organic goat and cow's milk;

Various types of cheeses, semi-hard or soft, PDO or conventional products;

Yoghurt, milk products from sheep, goats or cows, which are both traditional and European (different
varieties: reduced fat, mixed with fruits, cereals, honey, etc.);

Butter, cream, rice pudding, etc.
These dairy products are found throughout Greece. This is particularly the case for cheese in brine (Feta,
Telemes and Mpatzios), soft cheese (Galotyri), semi-hard cheese (Kaseri), hard cheese (Kefalotyri, Graviera
and Kefalogravriera), cheese whey, reduced fat cheese (Anthotyro and Mytzithra) and sour cream cheese
(Xinomytzithra). Numerous farms also produced in the past local sub-products like Tsalafouti. Some dairies still
do so today.
Thessaly, like Greece, so has a rich range of dairy products, including cheese certified according to the
European institutional framework. Specifications of the 13 main cheeses made in Greece and Thessaly are
presented in Appendix 1. Only one PDO cheese is produced exclusively in Thessaly: "Agrafa Graviera". This
typical cheese comes from a well-defined area in the Pindos in western Thessaly. The other nine Thessaly PDO
products have national recognition, the main one being Feta. All dairies therefore comply with the production
standards (HACCP, ISO) and the rules defined in the PDO specifications approved by the EU. In accordance
with these regulations, the cheese must be made with milk from local breeds and fed with the flora of the region.
The binding nature of these rules for Thessaly causes a delay in the regional dairy chain in identifying and
promoting its specific resources (natural and cultural) on the labels, symbols and other information material to
consumers in order increase the added value of the regional heritage (Barjolle and al., 2010; Bérard and
Marchenay, 2006, especially since Thessaly, through its geography, its traditions and manufacturing
techniques, is part of the "Mediterranean diet" area.
LOCATION AND CONCENTRATION OF CHEESE FACTORIES IN THESSALY
According to ELOGAK (2010), 75 cheese factories/ artisan dairies (13% of units in the country) are located in
Thessaly, which constitutes an important productive potential by its high degree of concentration and its
processing capacity of locally produced milk. These units are located throughout the Thessaly region, with a
higher concentration in the centre and north (Map 6). Another feature of Thessaly is that 66 processing units
produce PDO cheeses, or 18% of the national production capacity (Table 25).
25
January 2014
Map 6: Distribution of cheese factories (Feta) in Thessaly (2010)
Table 25: Distribution of cheese factories between the regional units of Thessaly (2010)
Regional units
Larissa
Trikala
Magnesia
Karditsa
Thessaly
Greece
Thessaly’s share of the national total
Artisanal dairies/
cheese factories (a)
41
16
13
5
75
597
13%
Units producing PDO
cheeses (b)
37
15
12
2
66
357
18%
% b/a
90%
94%
92%
40%
88%
60%
Source: ELOGAK
Production amounts to 30,300 tonnes of Feta PDO14, which shows the strength and capacity of the Thessaly
dairy chain to move towards quality products. Two units are cooperatives, which have existed for many years,
producing a wide range of products (fresh milk and organic cheese, and other dairy products) and make great
efforts to export. Table 26 shows the distribution of cheese factories producing PDO products according to their
milk processing capacity.
According to the ELOGAK data (2010), approximately 94,625 tonnes of sheep’s milk and 25,418 tonnes of goat’s milk are delivered to
dairies and cheese factories.
14
26
January 2014
Table 26: Size of PDO producing cheese factories in Thessaly (2010)
Quantity of processed
milk (tonnes/ year, sheep’s
milk equivalent)
> 8,000
2,680 – 8,000
1,600 – 2,680
400 – 1,600
< 400
Number of units
6
9
4
29
18
Number of milk
suppliers*
> 384
384
128
80
16
% milk collected
53%
27%
5%
13%
2%
% Feta produced
52%
27%
3%
15%
2%
* This concerns fictional herds of 125 dairy sheep/ farm, with a lactation period of 165 days/ year.
Source: ELOGAK
Also according to ELOGAK (2010), four PDO cheeses are produced in Thessaly (Table 27), but Feta accounts
for 95% of regional production while only a third (33%) of national production (31,000 tonnes against 95,000
tonnes). Thessaly has indeed a long tradition of Feta production and more and more companies are turning
towards export. .
Table 27: Production of PDO cheeses in Thessaly (2010)
Type of cheese
Kaseri
Galotyri
Manouri
Feta
Total
Quantity (tonnes)
666
83
896
31,316
32,961
%
2.0%
0.3%
2.7%
95.0%
100.0%
Source: ELOGAK
To the significant amount of the milk processed by the 75 Thessaly artisanal cheese factories and dairies, the
considerable quantity of milk processed into cheese or yoghurt in the traditional way by farmers themselves
(estimated at more than 4,000 tonnes) and distributed directly to end consumers must be added.
The dairy chain contributes significantly to regional employment, which is more pronounced at the national level
(Table 28). Thessaly represents 14% of employment on farms in Greece and 13% of employment in dairy
processing, while it contributes only 7% of national employment in the food industry. These differences reveal
the specialisation of Thessaly in dairy processing.
Table 28: Distribution of staff employed by the dairy chain in Thessaly and Greece (2012)
Livestock breeders
Dairy processing
Agri-food industries
Agro-industrial dairy chain
Trade/ services dairy chain
Thessaly
12,336
1,491
7,740
6,408
9,931
Greece
89,297
11,285
105,048
109,196
141,392
Thessaly/Greece
14%
13%
7%
6%
7%
Source: ELSTAT
1.3.5. Large companies in the territory
The development of the dairy chain and the weight of the Greek market are partly related to the presence of
large companies, which play an important role, both nationally and internationally. Their current position is the
result of a concentration process started 30 years ago following a weakening of the multitude of small local,
semi-cooperative and semi-state businesses. These large companies have based their growth on the rise of the
urban demand for cow's milk and fresh dairy products (from cows).
Today, processing cow's milk is dominated by five major groups: DELTA, FAGE, FRIESLAND, MEVGAL and
OLYMPOS. The latter is based in Larissa, the regional capital of Thessaly, and owns a large dairy in Larissa
and a large cheese factory in Trikala (cheeses made from milk from small ruminants). These two production
units are located in Thessaly. OLYMPOS has another dairy in Thrace (Rodopi) and two milk processing units in
the Balkan countries (Bulgaria and Romania).
DELTA, a VIVARTIA subsidiary and the first Greek agri-food holding, has a large dairy in Elassona in Thessaly
(milk from small ruminants) and two large dairies in Athens and Plati Imathias in Macedonia. It also had the
largest dairy plant in Cyprus until 2012 (sold).
FAGE has a large cheese factory in Trikala in Thessaly (semi-hard cheeses) and two dairies in Athens and
Amideo Florinas in Macedonia.
27
January 2014
With the exception of the MEVGAL group, whose dairy pool is in northern Greece (Macedonia and Thrace),
these large groups collect their cow’s milk in Thessaly. They manufacture a wide variety of dairy products and
have a well-organised distribution network with a large fleet of refrigerated trucks. They created their own
commercial networks established in Greece and especially in Thessaly, and are also present on the European
and U.S. markets.
Encouraged by the growth of the export of dairy products, including drained cow’s milk yoghurt, the large Greek
groups are making significant efforts to strengthen their presence abroad:

FAGE has made a major advertising campaign for the launch of "Frugo" yoghurt in Britain;

The EVOL cooperative, headquartered in Volos, in Thessaly, is increasing the productive capacity of its
facilities (including yoghurt) to tackle the U.S. market;

OLYMPOS is preparing the implementation of a yoghurt factory in the U.S.;

KRI-KRI is investing to better penetrate the market in the Netherlands, Great Britain and Italy.
These investments result from the rise in "Greek yoghurt" in foreign markets. In the U.S., sales doubled in 2006
following the launch of this product by the Greek company FAGE. This has encouraged multinational giants,
such as Kraft Foods and General Mills, to strengthen their presence in the U.S. market by introducing new
yoghurts. The total annual sales of "Greek" yoghurt in the U.S. were estimated at 1.5 billion USD in 2012,
representing 36% of total sales of the yoghurt in the U.S. (6.5 billion USD) according to the investment company
Alliance Berrnstein. In New York, 28 companies produce "Greek" yoghurt.
Faced with these large dairy groups, small dairy SMEs producing pasteurised milk and dairy products from
cow's milk (yoghurt, cream, etc.) have forged local branding, particularly in the recent period. Some of these
SMEs have a cooperative status15. Despite competition from large groups, they maintain a large share of the
national market (20 to 25%). However, their distribution networks are usually limited to local and regional
markets.
Figure 1 shows the position of these groups and regional SMEs on local and international markets.
Figure 1: Industrial dairy chain strategic groups
Cheese factories
Strong
e
OLYMPOS
TYRAS
KOLIOS
Dairies
FAGE
DELTA
MEBGAL
NESTLE
DODONI
OLYMPOS
DODONI
SERGAL
EVOL
ΤΡΙΚΚΙ
Branding
FAGE
DELTA
MEBGAL
NESTLE
SERGAL
EVOL
Low
Local
Target market
International
Local
Target market
International
Source: prepared by the authors; Lazani Adamadia (2009). "The Dodoni cooperative and its contribution to the development
of the dairy influence area." Thesis, Harokopio University, Athens.
Thus, regional businesses, especially cooperatives, have a better reputation, a strong distribution network and
good access to the local market. EVOL, a cooperative established in Magnesia (Thessaly) producing
pasteurised and fresh milk, is a good example of this success. Similarly, SMEs producing cheese in Thessaly
have forged strong links in the local market and have their own local distribution network.
15
These SMEs are Farma Koukaki, Eurofarma, Neogal Coop Lamia and TRIKI. The latter two are based in Thessaly.
28
January 2014
1.3.6. Related industries
In Thessaly, the relationship between the dairy chain and related industries is underdeveloped. However, the
potential associated with these companies and the first signs of cooperation open important perspectives.
A total of 60 food companies have expertise in the application of certification systems (integrated, PDO, PGI).
Some of these companies process products associated with the dairy chain, such as oil, hot peppers, almonds,
kiwis, cottonseed meal16 (Agrocert, Regional Directorate for Agricultural Development).
However, Thessaly dairy companies have established links with related industries located, in their vast majority,
outside the region. For the supply of agro ingredients (enzymes, etc.), almost all transactions are made with
foreign companies, including French and Italian companies. For the manufacture of barrels, the supplier is a
factory in Metsovo, a small town on the border of Thessaly and Epirus. An enzyme company is located in
Karditsa, founded following a company division, and includes a laboratory and biotechnology industries for the
development of medicinal and aromatic plants. Finally, a whey development project for manufacturing
energizers for athletes was recently launched.
Nationally, the weight of the agri-food dairy chain explains the presence of large companies. These could form
partnerships with companies in the dairy chain to diversify their product portfolio on international markets and
develop a competitive advantage. This tendency to penetrate international markets with a "basket of goods" was
confirmed by the field survey. National and European support for the creation of partnerships between academic
laboratories and companies helps to create entities for the establishment of cooperative R&D.
Active companies within the region cover a relatively wide range of productive activities, with more pronounced
concentration in some driving sectors to penetrate international markets while controlling the Greek market.
EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS
In Greece, numerous companies manufacture stainless steel products 17 and equipment18. In the absence of
national enterprise, the dairy chain is dominated by two foreign companies: the German company Westfalia and
the Swedish company DeLaval (ex-Alfa Laval), which market milking machines. However, these machines meet
the needs of large livestock operations and are not suitable for many small and medium farms 19. Due to the lack
of industrial supply, small farms are slow to adopt new technologies.
The presence of the irrigation industry, which offers environmental friendly technologies, such as microirrigation, is important and contributes to the efficient use of water, and to seed and hay development.
PACKAGING AND MULTI-SERVICES COMPANIES
The printing and packaging materials industry is attractive for national companies. It includes the production and
marketing of paper food packaging, cardboard and cans, food bags and composite materials, label printing
services, brochures and catalogues, and graphics, media, marketing and consulting services.
COMPANIES USING SUB-DAIRY PRODUCTS
In recent years, new companies have specialised in the development of milk sub-products, including casein (in
powder form), used as an adhesive (glue) in the timber industry. This activity is of great importance for the
national economy, unlike the use of casein in the manufacture of paper, textiles, plastics and paints, or wine,
which does not allow casein producers to generate profit due to decreasing prices. Other companies also use
the ingredients for the production of whey protein powder (Elliniki Proteini SA), food for bees (EvangelopoulosKarditsa), bakery energy products, and organic protein products with high-added value.
Finally, in recent years there has been a strengthening of relations between the dairy chain and the functional
products dairy chain, with the involvement of biotechnology laboratories (University of Crete, Thessaly, etc.). In
the pharmaceutical dairy chain, cooperation with the dairy chain is also progressing nationally (in particular with
the University of Crete) and regionally in response to the recognition by research findings of the benefits of
certain properties of milk for the immune system.
16
In this category, women's cooperatives play a special role since they produce products with strong, local characteristics based on sheep's
milk and other dairy products (butter, cheese, etc.).
17
These include: INOX VESSEL HELLAS (production of stainless mechanical equipment, mainly tanks for industries processing and
storage of liquid foodstuffs, beverages and chemicals) Αφοι Πραπόπουλοι ΑΕ ALPHA STEEL (centre of professional equipment).
18
Milk tanks, TANK CONTAINER, stainless containers with screw cap, refrigeration tanks, etc.
19
These companies offer machines with 24 places while smaller farms need machines with 2/4 places.
29
January 2014
AGRI-FOOD BUSINESS
The agri-food dairy chain, which includes a large number of dynamic companies, has close links with the dairy
chain, but these links are limited to the use of milk as raw material. Three important examples can be cited:

"Tyropitas" producers (modern industries and artisanal units) (cheese puff pastries, popular in Greece and
consumed daily as a snack) buy from small cheese factories and distribute their products through a dense
network of national sales outlets, which covers the whole of Greece. Two companies are distinguished:
BARBA STATHIS SA and Alpha-Kozanis. In addition to its national distribution network, Alpha-Kozanis
exports to 28 countries (Europe, USA and Australia) and works closely with a medium-sized Thessaly
cheese factory (Tzafetas), which provides the raw material (cheese and mytzithra);

Many artisanal units located throughout Greece use yoghurt for making Tzatziki, a kind of very refreshing
salad made from cucumber and garlic, and massively consumed by the Greeks and tourists;

ALMI ABEE, founded in 1996, produces peppers stuffed with cheese, a traditional entry highly demanded
by European markets.
Dairy products are also used by the food industry as ingredients in baking, cakes, cold meats and animal feed in
the form of milk powder and whey. They are found in the following areas:

Biscuit factories, which export much of their production and use of condensed and/ or butter milk;

Dietary supplement industries;

Artisanal bakers;

Frozen pasta industries (with companies like Barba Stathis20, Nutriart21 and Viotros SA22)
The result is a dichotomy: facing the major competitive companies in international markets, and relying on the
quality and authenticity of their products, there are thousands of small-scale units scattered throughout the
national territory, and particularly in the Peloponnese, which produces Tarhana soup and noodles made from
fresh sheep’s milk.
Large companies have shortcomings compared to traditional Greek workshops. In the words of the artisans,
eggs and milk used are imported by major modern industries. The development of small-scale units is
undeniable because their products are widely preferred by Greek consumers. The main problem with these
artisanal units is their inability to expand their market beyond their territory. Encouraging them to cooperate and
to network could lead to other markets.
The increase in demand for dairy products, recognition of their nutritional value and the consolidation of the
Greek dairy chain already seem to have a positive impact on cooperation with related industries in the dairy
chain. The impact is much less visible in Thessaly. Small-scale economies created by these industries in the
area can contribute to strengthening this cooperation. This development opens up new opportunities for
improvement in terms of comparative differential advantages and as well as marketing. The dynamism of
related industries is powered by their ability to innovate and use R&D to produce traditional foods or new
products (functional milk-based products, ingredients and/ or dairy products). The Thessaly dairy chain must be
prepared to take advantage of this trend.
REVIEW
The cheese factory/ dairy chain in Greece is characterised by a high concentration in Thessaly and a strong
specialisation in the production of Feta. However, the region fails to fully exploit the benefits of the Feta PDO
label and benefit from the added value created thereof (lack of collective promotion and marketing strategy
structures).
The development of the dairy chain is based, firstly, on a strong pastoral traditions and the presence of
significant livestock (number of farms, local breeds, milk production covering the dairy/ cheese factory needs)
and, secondly, livestock competitiveness thanks to the local production of abundant fodder and animal feed.
This highlights a major strength of the dairy chain in Thessaly.
20
Barba Stathis has a leading position in the Greek market and supplies the market with frozen pasta brand "golden pasta". The industry is
supported by its own scientists, collaborating with Greek research centres. Its trademark "7DAYS Bake it" (for the international market) is
one of the most requested by the markets of the Balkans and Europe (Spain, Germany, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, etc.), but also the
United States, Canada and Australia. The brand also offers amongst others, small cheese pasta (VIVARTIA, branch of MIG).
21
The development of this sector and its strategic adaptations to move towards export is testified by the 2009 merger of three large
companies with a leading position in the Greek market (Katselis, Allatini and ELVIPET) and the creation of Nutriart. Amongst its products
are also frozen dough and confectionery.
22
Viotros SA is the largest industry in the production and packaging of cheese and alternative cheese products based on vegetable fat. It
occupies a dominant position in the European market.
30
January 2014
For cow's milk, the local production of animal feed enhances the development trend and the concentration of
cattle farms, creating a major dairy cattle pool for Greece, which supplies all major national dairy industries, but
also cheese factories/ local dairies. However, the pattern of rapid growth of cattle farms imposed by large
dairies could influence the evolution of the dairy chain, particularly in the current financial crisis.
31
January 2014
2. Thessaly field survey
2.1. Sampling and methodology
2.1.1. Sample representativeness
The investigation has focused on the main actors (target groups) of the dairy chain in the territory. These groups
include farmers, processors and suppliers, and also support structures, allied industries, distributors, tourist
operators and food outlets. For each of these groups, a survey sample was defined on the basis of specific
project goals and criteria related to the specificities of the Thessaly dairy chain. All regional and local authorities
(demes and region) were also encountered. The issue of representativeness of the sample of farmers was the
most problematic due to the large number of farms in the area (> 10,000). Faced with this problem, a systemic
approach was adopted and farms were grouped into three distinct production systems.
LIVESTOCK BREEDING FARMS
To ensure the representativeness of the sample farms, two characteristics of the Thessaly dairy chain were
taken into account:

The existence of two national production systems
Most farms maintain a traditional sheep and goat extensive breeding system. There are mainly farmers from the
mountains, descendants of former Pindos nomads, who settled permanently in mountainous and lowland areas
from 1920 and mostly after 1960. These farmers can be divided into two subgroups: the older generation
without any succession; the new generation, who has taken over in recent years due to the resumption of
livestock. This second subgroup strengthens a) the possibility, on a local scale, of extensive production meeting
the expectations of consumers who want safe, quality products and b) the development, since the reform of the
CAP of 2003 (decoupling) and particularly since the beginning of the crisis, of modern sheep and cows barns
funded through European aid. The survey sample slightly favoured semi-intensive farms as a new system yet
little studied.

The role of small geographical units of territorial cohesion, structured around a small town, in the
development of the distribution and the consolidation of farms
Such units are generally located at the boundary between the Thessaly plain and the mountain areas.
Historically, they have played a mediating role between urban lowland and mountain areas, whose economy
was based on a strong breeding. This relationship, as well as the settlement of nomads in these areas, explains
to a large extent the current specialisation in milk production. Despite the intervention of major national and
multinational dairy companies in Thessaly, powerful relationships persist between pastoralists and small local
dairies within these areas for the collection of milk. This is why the survey was not only interested in the whole
of livestock production systems in Thessaly, but also their concentration within the historical territorial units
farms, questioning the level of informal consistency of these units and the strength of relationships between
farmers and processors.
Based on these elements, the sample was defined by taking into account, amongst others, the altitude (plain,
semi-mountain or mountains) due to the close relationship between the existence of pastures and the location
and type of operating system (Table 29).
32
January 2014
Table 29: Distribution of the farmers’ sample in the territory
Territories
Production system
Regional units
No.
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
1
8
Trikala
Larisa
Karditsa
Magnesia
Total
Breeding territories
Kalampaka
Farkadona
Pyli
Elassona
Tempi
Tyrnabos
Farsala
Sofades
Karditsa
Palamas
Mouzaki
M KAR
Velestino
Almyros
Extensive/
succession
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
4
1
1
23
Intensive sheep
2
1
1
3
5
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
27
Intensive cattle
1
1
2
1
2
7
Total
4
3
3
5
8
5
4
4
3
3
5
6
2
2
57
Map 7: Distribution of livestock farms by pastures’ altitude
P = plain (37%)
M = mountain (23%)
SM = semi-mountain (9%)
SM/P = location in the plain but close to semimountain pastures (31%)
M
P
SM
SM
P
P
Map 8: Distribution of the sample according to breeding territories
Elas
Kal
Tempi
Tyr/Lar
Far
Pal
O Kar
Vel
Mouz
Fars
Sof
Alm
33
January 2014
ANIMAL FEED PRODUCERS
Of the 56 companies producing and marketing animal feed located in Thessaly, a sample of 15 companies was
selected based on the following criteria: capacity, volume of feed concentrates, size (small, medium and large).
From this sample, 12 companies responded and were surveyed. They are distributed as follows in the area:

Trikala: 27 companies in total => 4 respondents (1 small, 2 medium and 1 large), 2 cooperatives;

Karditsa: 4 companies in total => four respondents (3 small and 1 medium);

Magnesia: 8 companies in total => 2 respondents (1 large and 1 medium);

Larissa: 17 companies in total => 2 respondents (2 medium).
PROCESSING UNITS
Of the 75 processing units located in Thessaly, 20 cheese factories/ dairies of different sizes were surveyed,
represented 26.7% of the total number of units. The main selection criteria were size, location, type and number
of products. They permitted the establishment of an initial list (Table 30).
Table 30: Distribution of processing units by annual volume of processed milk
Milk volume
No. of
units
1st sample
1
0-500
8+9
2
2
501-1,000
11
2
3
1,001-2,000
18
5
4
2,001-3,000
9
4
5
3,001-7,000
6
4
6
9,000-12,000
5
3
7
Total
13,000-60,000
9
66+9
5
25
Class
Unit name
Zacharis (Far), Tsantilis (M-Lar),
Farma-Notas (Μ-Lar), Voskos (El)
Veroukas (Alm), Pedis (Kal), Tsaknakis
(Ver), Gaitanidi (Kar)
Laitsia (Vel), Karakanas (Stef),
Bebezas (Trik), Vlahogiannis (Kal),
Tahas (Tempi)
Kissas (Mouz), Kaltsoudas (Kal), Yfantis
(Fark), Mitsiou (Elas)
ΑAvramoulis (Tempi), Dalakouras (Alm)
Divani (Trik), Tzafetas (Tyr)
Pilio-Tyrokomiki (Vel), Lytras (Lar),
Giotsas (ELas)
Roussas (Alm), Noussias (Lar), EAS
(Trik), Bizios (El), Vigla Olympe (El)
Final
sample
%
4
24
3
27
3
17
3
33
3
50
2
40
2
20
22
Given the structure of this population, the focus was on two cheese factory groups:

Small cheese factories (sample of 25% of classes 1 and 2), due to their high number (28 units processing
less than 1,000 tonnes of milk, 37% of the total number of units) and their strong local roots (milk, fodder,
short circuits);

Medium-sized cheese factories (from 2,000 to 12,000 tonnes), which combine both a strong local presence
and an ability to move towards national and international markets (40% of sample classes 4, 5 and 6).
The third group the one of large companies, has a much more national and international profile. The group is
slightly under-represented because of the managers’ refusal to answer the questionnaire. This problem was
partially circumvented by semi-structured interviews with the Union of Agricultural Cooperatives of Trikala,
Kissas, Tzafeta, Laitsos and Zaharis.
Medium-sized dairies appear as a strategic group because of their large numbers and their positioning between
the two ends of the chain, which have no real contact. Their strategy regarding the upstream and downstream
industry has been analysed in depth. A particular interest has been devoted to their position in the territory, for
the following reasons:

SMEs base their strategy on the traditional close relationship with the productive potential of farmed areas
within the Thessaly area;

A high concentration of processing units is observed in northern Thessaly (14 companies surveyed, 70% of
the sample), particularly in the North East (8,40% of the sample).
Modification of the original sample is due to:

The fact that the data used initially applied only to companies producing under the PDO;
34
January 2014
During the pre-survey, 9 other companies not producing under the PDO were identified (Table 31). Amongst
them, the most representative were selected based on their products (yoghurt, cream, etc.), their size and their
location.
Table 31: Distribution of processing units by type of production and by regional units
PDO
Others
Total

Larissa
37
4
41
Trikala
15
1
16
Karditsa
2
3
5
Magnesia
12
13
Thessaly
66
9
75
Greece
357
240
597
%
18.5
3.75
12.5
The refusal of large companies to be available for a meeting was justified by foreign travel or work overload
(Table 32).
Table 32: Distribution of processing units surveyed by the annual volume of milk processed
Quantity of processed milk
(tonnes/ year - sheep’s milk equivalent)
> 8,000
2,680-8,000
1 600-2,680
400-1,600
< 400
Total
Units surveyed
Units
Number
1
2
3
8
5
19
6
9
4
29
18
68
%
16.7
22
75
27.5
27.7
SALES AND CONSUMPTION OUTLETS
The survey conducted in large and small urban centres of Thessaly focused on the following categories of dairy
product sales outlets:

Traditional points sale of artisanal yoghurt (6 respondents);

New types of stores (small cheese supermarkets/ delicatessens) (3 respondents);

Cheese factories (7 respondents);

Mini-markets (2 respondents);

Restaurants and catering (2 respondents).
Table 33: Distribution of artisanal dairy product sales outlets
by type and consumption centres in Thessaly
Types of sales outlets
Small cheese supermarkets
Dairies
Dairies/ cold meats
Dairies/ cheese factories
Cheese factories
Groceries/ traditional products
Delicatessens
Restaurants/ catering
Karditsa
1
1
Trikala
1
1
2
1
1
Larissa
Magnesia
2
5
2
1
1
1
Total
2
2
2
3
5
2
2
2
WHOLESALERS AND SALES REPRESENTATIVES
To understand the role and image of Thessaly dairy products for consumers, interviews were conducted with
potential buyers in a large supermarket chain (AB Vasilopoulos), with the largest importer of Greek food in the
U.S. and Canada (Krinos SA), as well as one of the largest traditional Greek products retail store in the centre of
Athens ("Mediterranean food grocery store").
NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS AND INVESTIGATIONS IDENTITY
The following figures show, respectively, the number of persons who responded to the survey and the number
of people who participated in an interview for each target group of the industry: farmers (57 questionnaires, 10
interviews), farmers’ groups (3 questionnaires, 5 interviews), dairies (19 questionnaires, five interviews), sale
and consumption outlets (17 questionnaires, 3 interviews), consulting companies (1 interview), distributors (2
interviews), livestock feed producers (12 questionnaires, 2 interviews), related industries (2 interviews), tour
operators (2 interviews), mayors and deputy mayors (4 interviews), R&D laboratory (3 questionnaires, 3
35
January 2014
interviews), research and training centres (5 questionnaires, 1 interview), consular chambers (3 questionnaires,
3 interviews), development agencies (1 questionnaire), consumer unions (2 questionnaires), regional offices (2
questionnaires, 7 interviews), members of the Regional Council (3 interviews), Secretary General of the
Thessaly Region (2) and the Ministry of Agriculture (1)23.
2.1.2. Data processing method and results
Data collected on farms, cheese factories/ dairies and sales outlets were entered into an Access database, and
then processed in Excel. RICA methodology was applied to the calculation of the technical-economic orientation
of the 57 livestock farms in the sample. It concerns mono-specific farms (sheep, goats and cows), with mixed
small ruminants and mixed ruminants (Table 34).
Table 34: Technico-economic orientation and herd size of the sample
Types of livestock
Sheep
Goats
Cows
Mixed small ruminants
Mixed ruminants
Total
No. farms
38
6
5
6
2
57
Dairy sheep
(head/ EA)
328
Dairy goats
(head/ EA) )
Dairy cows
(head/ EA)
Other cows
(head/ EA)
148
189
215
368
65
13
30
25
2.2. Current state of the industry and strategic priorities for its
development
2.2.1. Summary of survey results
This chapter examines the problems faced by different parts of the dairy chain in Thessaly to identify
weaknesses and blockages, resources and skills to develop and the priorities proposed by actors. Analysis is
based on the results of the survey of fodder producers, breeders, processors and distributors (specific
questionnaires) as well as representatives of institutions and some large dairies (semi-structured interviews).
MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES AND THE LIVESTOCK FEED SYSTEM
The problem of identifying and delineating areas of pasture compared to forest areas persists on a legislative
level, preventing effective long-term management and often discouraging the establishment of young farmers.
The asset in Thessaly in this area is the abundance of pastures of which the fodder quality could still be
improved as part of a specific programme.
Breeders can also ensure the supply of fodder crops of the Thessaly plain by self-production or through local
marketing channels. In both cases, access to fodder is characterised by a close proximity within a radius of 1 to
20 km for small units and 25 to 100 km for the largest. The shorter the supply radius, the more these
transactions are based on interpersonal relationships.
In the second case, farmers often struggle to meet the cost of fodder purchased, which is relatively high given
the proximity of cultivated land in the plain. This is relatively expensive due to the intervention of various
intermediaries in the marketing chain, such as transporters sometimes also playing the role of an intermediary
business, creating real asymmetry in the market. The recent law on the liberalisation of public transport should
address these distortions in the market for fodder. On the other hand, farmers find meeting their financial
obligations to fodder suppliers increasingly difficult due to the domino effect of the economic crisis and the lack
of liquidity in the market: cheese factories no longer pay in advance or are slow to reimburse farmers (because
they have not themselves been paid by the distributors); the latter lose their credibility with the fodder producers
and thus the availability of fodder necessary for the proper conduct of their livestock. Finally, dairy companies
are often involved in acting as guarantors for livestock breeders to farmers.
Two main critical points have emerged regarding upstream livestock operations: poor management of pastures
and an unbalanced livestock diet, which play both on livestock productivity and the quality of the milk produced.
However, the Thessaly region is rich in resources for livestock feed: pastures in mountainous and semimountainous areas (but of mixed quality due to overload problems or abandonment), communal grasslands in
lowland areas (but monopolised by profitable arable crops), plain land with high productivity for cereal crops and
legumes (but no economic interest in the productivist model supported by the CAP system subsidies). The
23
See Appendix 2 for a detailed breakdown of responses to questionnaires and interviews by actor category.
36
January 2014
renewed interest in farming (productive impasses in agriculture, increasing demand for dairy products) and
recent trends in crop restructuring in the plain require rethinking of the sustainable management of pastures and
improvement of the livestock rations in order to reduce production costs and increase milk yields.
As mentioned in Part 1 of the report, several favourable conditions are satisfied on this point:

The local authorities of the new demes from the administrative reform of 2010, which are in charge of their
territory’s communal pastures, seem willing (interviews with mayors) to make plans for fodder improvement
and rational management of pastures, and to resolve confrontations between agricultural and forestry
services on the land status of pastures resulting from the ambiguity of the institutional framework. They also
seem determined to recover the old, cleared pastures and communal grasslands (leased to farmers).

The Ministry of Rural Development and Food has launched a political incentive for fodder crops. This device
should facilitate better regionalisation of fodder production and the farming system, and thus enhance the
quality and identity of dairy products.

Increasing fodder and legume products locally will enable the development of rations better adapted to the
needs of livestock.
LIVESTOCK BREEDING: FARM CONDUCT STRUCTURE AND SYSTEMS
Two production systems are practiced for small ruminants: semi-extensive and semi-intensive. The first system
traditionally practiced (including transhumant herds) is the most common in Thessaly and the most studied. It is
based on local breeds and rudimentary buildings (often sheet metal because of the ban on construction in the
communal lands standards). Food is mainly from rangelands, except in winter (November to February), where
grain and hay are used. Pastoral areas represent 81% of the UAL and are part of the communal land. As
cropland does not cover the needs of the winter feed, farms buy 70% of their feed concentrates and 76% of
their fodder. This dependency requires them to apply in September24 to cheese factories for advanced
payments of between 30 and 50% of the value of the milk produced to pay their local suppliers (producers of
cereals, corn and alfalfa hay).
Figure 2: Performance of dairy sheep semi-extensive systems (litres/ head)
As milking is manual, the system requires hard work, mainly within the family. The proportion of farms using
hired labour (immigrants) is very low (four out of 17 semi-extensive farms). Furthermore, the generational
transmission seems to be assured as only five of the 17 farms concerned have no successor.
Milk productivity is around 100 litres/ sheep milked. The low yields are due to an unbalanced diet, breeding with
non-selected animals (lack of services and technical support) and the accommodation conditions of rudimentary
herds. The lack of technical assistance in feeding and breeding (especially with Karagouniko and Frisarta
breeds) is reflected in the large variations in milk yield between farms (Figure 2).
The economic viability of this operating system is supported by European grants (40% or more of family farm
income) and the fact that farms of this system, according to the Feta PDO regulation, are the only legal
suppliers.
24
The balance is settled in the month of July-August.
37
January 2014
Figure 3: Performance of dairy sheep semi-intensive systems (litres/ head)
The development of the semi-intensive system is recent (2000s) and has favourable economic results for
breeding small ruminants related to the final registration of Feta as a PDO cheese and also new directions of
the CAP of 2005 (decoupling). The latter favoured the partial release of irrigated land previously used for cotton
crops (heavily subsidised under the previous CAP) for the production of feed (corn and alfalfa), as well as
research by farm of the income derived from the market (including small ruminants with high milk productivity).
Therefore, 17 of the 28 semi-intensive farms in the sample were created over the past 10 years. Mechanised
processes are widespread; milk yield is around 260 litres/ sheep (Table 35) and the treatment period up to eight
months. Many farms organise births for milk production throughout the year. But, as for semi-extensive farms,
the lack of effective and continuous counselling on feeding and genetic improvement (especially with the
Chiotiko breed) causes large variations in the milk yield (Figure 3).
Table 35: Average structure of sheep farms in the sample by farm system
Sheep farm system
No. of farms in the sample
UAL (ha)
Cropland (ha)
% UAL leased/ UAL
% Cropland leased/ UAL
% Pastoral Land/ UAL
% Rangelands leased/ UAL
No. head/ farm
Milk yield (litres/ head)
% of feed concentrates purchased/ total
consumption of feed concentrates
% of fodder purchased/ total fodder
consumption
Semi-extensive
17
44.2
8.3
91%
10%
81%
79%
258
96
Semi-intensive
28
31.9
18.3
77%
37%
41%
34%
356
257
Total
45
33
14
83%
27%
57%
53%
319
206
70.30%
59.70%
65.83%
76.15%
49.74%
58.23%
The feeding system differs from the semi-extensive system. Feeding is done mainly in barns; farms have pellet
mills, grain elevators, etc. for the manufacture of rationed feed concentrates. To cope with the increased
demand for food, farms grow cereals, corn and alfalfa (soybean meal, minerals, etc. are purchased from
specialised traders). Farms attempt to produce the food needed (on average 59% of the UAL is devoted to
these crops), but must still buy 60% of feed concentrates and 50% of the fodder used (local producers). This
dependence on the market forces them to request from the cheese factories monthly payments for the milk
delivered in order to have the necessary liquidity. Thus, farms face significant depreciation (buildings and
equipment) and food costs, often exceeding 80% of the total cost of milk, which requires them to develop the
dairy productivity of their herds (feed and genetic improvement).
For goat farming, semi-extensive and semi-intensive production systems are similar to those of sheep farms,
with the only difference that in the semi-extensive system, goats are fed mainly in bush land pastures (Table
36). These operations therefore depend very little on the food market (only 21% of feed concentrates and 14%
fodder are purchased).
38
January 2014
Table 36: Average structure of goat farms in the sample by farm system
Sheep farm system
UAL (ha)
Cropland (ha)
% UAL leased/ UAL
No. head/ farm
consumption
Semi-extensive
4
110.6
8.1
97%
4%
93%
93%
77
143
Semi-intensive
10
6.7
2.5
71%
19%
63%
63%
100
293
Total
14
36.4
4.1
93%
6%
89%
89%
93
258
20.54%
64.74%
54.36%
14.27%
75.66%
61.24%
Table 37: Average structure of cattle farms in the sample by farm system
Cattle farm system
UAL (ha)
Cropland (ha)
% UAL leased/ UAL
No. head/ farm
consumption
Medium
2
23.9
12.3
91%
46%
49%
46%
43
4,709.3
Large
4
27
27
78%
78%
0%
0%
230
10,005.4
Total
6
26
22.1
82%
68%
15%
14%
168
9,552.7
69.57,%
81.35%
80.32%
70.57%
85.96%
84.62%
Two dairy cow farms groups can be distinguished according to their size (Table 37): medium and large.
The medium-sized farms have an average of 43 Holstein dairy cows, with poor milk yield (4.7 tonnes/ cow).
They try to reduce inputs (feed) by also using grasslands (49% of UAL) and producing feed, reaching a selfsufficiency rate of 30%.
Large farms (driven by the dairy industries), have an average of 230 Holstein cows with a stable food supply
and a milk yield of 10 tonnes/ cow. To cope with their significant needs for food, they cultivate all their available
land and have all the necessary equipment for silage. However, their self-sufficiency is very low (19% for grains
and 15% for fodder). These operations are very sensitive to changes in the price of milk because of their need
for cash to buy food and pay their rapid expansion-related debts. Some are members of the Thessgala regional
cooperative for dairy production, which was created to negotiate the price of milk with dairy industries. The
cooperative works with another regional cooperative, Thess-gi, recently established and specialised in the
production of feed, to ensure regular supplies. One of the farms produces yoghurt and markets it. Finally, the
crisis has forced many farms to turn to the production of a traditional type of "Feta" cheese, but made from
cow’s milk called "Telemes" in collaboration with cheese factories in the region.
One of the strategic issues for the Thessaly dairy chain is the ability of livestock farms, especially small
ruminants, to improve productivity and strengthen their local roots. In this sense, the specifications of Thessaly
PDO cheeses have a structural character. However, the first finding of the survey is the low yield of the
extensive farms with strong, local roots. One of the action priorities for the development of the dairy chain must
therefore be strengthening this anchorage, particularly in intensive farms, for the genetic potential quality and
livestock feed.
The field survey also revealed that the actors of the livestock feed dairy chain do not highlight the importance of
nutrition and ration in the higher milk yield. Farmers rely on traditional methods of livestock feeding. They
acquire purebred animals to increase yields, but neglect to adjust the ration to the needs of their herds. Bilateral
and/ or group meetings and exchange of views with all parties involved led, firstly, to assess the yield losses (10
to 15%), and secondly, to examine the possibility of developing an appropriate structure and effective technical
assistance. Participants aware of the potential of improving the efficiency of local breeds recognised the
importance of such a structure, especially as Thessaly offers competent services and fodder crops and feed in
sufficient quantity and of high quality.
39
January 2014
Finally, the lack of dialogue and coordination between the different partners of the feed dairy chain related to the
fragmentation of representative bodies and the Greek administrative system reform in progress seems
problematic. Recognising the need for major organisation in this area, bringing together all the fodder
producers, breeders and processors, the actors have agreed on the need to create a technical centre and
extension in Thessaly.
PROCESSING: DYNAMICS OF MODERNISATION AND INERTIA IN TECHNICAL AND ORGANISATIONAL
INNOVATION
The survey sample included 19 Thessaly cheese factories/ dairies selected in the SME category. These
companies were divided into three subgroups according to their size (capacity for milk processing), their
organisational characteristics and their strategy: five medium-sized dairies (2,500-7,500 tonnes), six small
processing units (700 to 1,300 tonnes) and eight very small units (70 to 400 tonnes), including one cooperative.
Eleven of 19 have a collective partnership structure. Four units were created in the 1970s while five smaller
units were founded after 2005.

Investment in the modernisation of technical structures
Almost all small and medium-sized processing units have made investments to modernise their facilities and
equipment (production chain, vehicle fleet, photovoltaic panels and construction of facilities) through EU funding
programmes (or co-funded), mainly in the years 2000 to 2009. Very small sample units are not included
because most of them were founded after 2000. Overall, facilities and equipment including processing,
pasteurisation and refrigeration are fairly recent (early 2000s), even in cheese factories installed for over 40
years. These units conform to all EU regulations concerning the quality of milk processing. They have trucks to
supply raw milk from farms and refrigerated trucks for the distribution of the finished products.

Personnel and specific services
The staff employed varies with the size and production capacity. The larger the company, the more the number
of permanent employees decreases and temporary employees increase (workers and truck drivers). All
companies have at least one certified technician specialising in dairy processing (two years of university studies
or university degree). However, no marketing specialist/ product promotion has been identified amongst the
companies surveyed. This activity is carried out by the owner. Product promotion at the regional level is often
supported by the refrigerated truck drivers distributing the products. For all chemical and microbiological
analyses, processors rely on private laboratories (except most cheese factories, which have their own chemical
laboratory managed by a specialist). They also rely on control offices, quality certification (HACCP) and
accounting companies. All units are also subject to controls by three para-governmental facilities, AGROCERT,
ELOGAK and EFET, for certification of their PDO products and the health and safety of their milk.

Milk supply: collection pools and price formation for the livestock breeder
Milk collection systems are organised on various radii depending on the size and capacity of the processing
units. For larger units, the radius can reach up to 100 km, while for very small units this distance does not
exceed 10 km (Table 38).
Table 38: Structure of cheese factories/ dairies surveyed in Thessaly by size
Quantity of milk processed (tonnes/ year, sheep’s milk equivalent)
> 8,000
2,680-8,000
1,600-2,680
400-1,600
< 400
Units
6
9
4
29
18
Units surveyed
1
2
3
8
5
Permanent employees (average/ unit)
16
11
8
6
4
Temporary employees (average/ unit)
7
10
12
1
1
External employees (average/ unit)
4
2
4
3
2
Average number of small ruminant breeding farms of different sizes providing milk/ farming
Small (< 50 sheep/ goats)
7
2
10
4
Medium-sized (50-250 sheep/ goats)
340
35
136
25
8
Large (> 250 sheep/ goats)
80
168
32
14
Average number of dairy cow breeding farms of different sizes providing milk/ farming
Small (< 20 cows)
Medium-sized (20-150 cows)
1
1
Large (> 150 cows)
1
Milk collection radius (km)
100
70
50
30
10
40
January 2014
Increased milk needs and the need to reduce the cost of collections has led medium-sized processors25 to buy
from medium or large farms. They often ask farms, especially with high productivity, to produce milk throughout
the year in order to work 12 months/ year, to fully exploit their productive capacity and thereby reduce the
burden of facilities and equipment depreciation.
Competition between processors for the supply of milk from small ruminants forces the most dynamic units to
extend their collection radius of beyond the boundaries of their regional production pool. They offer more
favourable conditions for farmers and small dairies/ cheese factories through more timely payment of milk and
thus attract new suppliers. Small dairies/ cheese factories sourcing mainly from small and medium-sized semiextensive farming based on long-term interpersonal trust are often founded on an intergenerational basis of
pastoral and cultural knowledge. Their collection pool is local (10-30 km) and largely coincides with the
boundaries of the new pastoral tradition demes, such as Elassona, Velstino, etc. (Map 9). Since a large part of
the units produce yoghurts, cream and milk, they are also supplied by one or two local dairy cow farms each.
This forged territorial system concerns both medium-sized units and small and very small units. Meanwhile,
medium-sized and large units are supplied in raw milk outside the territory within a radius of over 100 km. The
connection between local farmers and cheese factories is often based on traditional, long-term relationships
(many cheesemakers are descendants of old herder families of nomadic ethnic groups, such as the Vlachs and
Sarakatsanes). Each cheese factory has developed its own dairy pool according to its capacity and funding is
based on oral agreements, which is not the case between dairy farmers and dairies. The price of milk from small
ruminants is set between December and January, two to three months after the start of the milk year. Producers
receive an advance in September, which corresponds to approximately 30% of the value of the milk produced,
to buy feed (corn, grain, hay) needed for winter. The remaining milk is paid in cash or by check in July (end of
the dairy year) and the date of payment is negotiable. This practice is becoming more and more widespread due
to the effects of the crisis on corporate liquidity26.
Map 9: Location of the 19 processing units in the sample
D
5
Elas
Β
2
D
4
D
2
E
2
Mouz
Far
D
1
E
E
54
3 Tyr/Lar C
D
1
3 Far E
k
4Β1
Pal
Α1
2
ar
1
D
6
Tempi
Vel
Sof
Far
C
5
E
1
Far
s
Alm
r A2
Red: cow’s milk; black: sheep’s milk and/ or no cows
A, B, C, etc.: company size
Regarding the price of milk paid to the farmer, there are no major differences between the cheese factories:
from 0.95 to 0.98 €/ litre of sheep’s milk and 0.55 to 0.58 €/ litre of goat’s milk. The quality premium is applied by
a single cheese factory. In contrast, the price of milk may be reduced in case of lower quality (low casein). Most
cheesemakers believe that milk quality has much improved over the last decade, with a decrease in microbes
and an increase in the casein content. Cheesemakers distribute cooling tanks for farmers, which facilitates the
collection and transport of milk by their own trucks. Two cheese factories differ from the rest of the sample
offering 0.10 €/ litre to farmers that carry milk to the cheese factories by their own means.
25
These needs are shared by the large units, which are not included in the sample.
Faced with this situation, we are witnessing the emergence of a movement from below and to the formation of cooperatives and producer
groups by small ruminant farmers to collectively negotiate the price of milk and sign contracts with cheese factories. This movement is still at
the initiation stage. Also, some cheese makers question the system of cash advances due to the banking crisis and the resulting shortage of
funding.
26
41

January 2014
Range of products and packaging
Medium-sized cheese factories within the sample size specialise in the production of three to four standardised
quality cheeses wherein the Feta PDO dominates. The vast majority of volumes produced are absorbed by
nationwide supermarket chains. Small and very small units have a more diverse range of products, including
typical local cheeses, such as "Nivato" and "Galotyri", traditional sheep or cow’s milk yoghurt and cream mainly
sold on the local and regional market through personal contacts. In all cases, a minority of the production is
destined for foreign markets, thanks to the spontaneous participation of the processor in international food fairs.
For product packaging and packing, cheese factories have changed from packaging Feta in barrels (60 kg) to
metal cans (16 kg) and in trays or vacuum. For other cheeses, the general practice is selling in bulk (in
containers or vacuum, depending on the product type), especially as Greek consumers retain the habit of
buying bulk cheese by weight and without packaging. However, given the success of small quantities of cheese
packed due to lack of time to queue in supermarkets, cheesemakers consider the possibility of changing their
packaging to improve the promotion of their production.
It is interesting to note that some companies have changed the type of packing and packaging of their products
although they all have their own packaging equipment. Amongst those having made changes, only two have
incorporated any innovation: airtight and wood packaging.
Most processors consider that the product packaging needs to be improved, both in terms of size, quality of
packaging materials or labelling. However, due to the low profits generated for the cheesemakers due to the
high cost of milk and low retail prices paid by the retailer, the cost of these changes is prohibitive.
Despite the modernisation of technical equipment and the progress made in the field of packaging (from the
Feta barrel to the Feta vacuum), the cheese factories surveyed appear to be behind in the modernisation of
their organisation and their marketing techniques (rudimentary operational, logistics, etc.). In addition, their low
level of innovation in products (lightweight, functional, identity, etc.) and presentation (packaging and labels) do
not allow them to meet the new demands of niche markets.
MARKETING SYSTEMS AND MARKETING STRATEGY WEAKNESSES
The analysis of responses to the questionnaire by processing enterprises (especially small and medium-sized
dairies and very small dairies producing yoghurt and cream) highlights weaknesses in marketing strategies.
They are mainly related to the lack of specialised marketing executives within companies. Only two of the 19
companies surveyed had permanent employees for this activity, two others use an external service provider,
while three others train their own staff in marketing techniques. This explains the lack of a business
development culture in these companies.
However, the main problem is the lack of an overall marketing strategy. None of the companies surveyed have
developed any integrated programme for the promotion of cheeses and other dairy products. Therefore, the
actions needed for recovery of the products, pricing, distribution channels and the system of promotion and
presentation of products have not been achieved.
Companies would also benefit from improving their distribution networks and discovering new ones. In fact, their
sales networks are generally limited to personal relationships they have forged with local wholesalers and
retailers. The target markets are primarily local or regional, marketed through conventional channels:
supermarkets, restaurants, supermarket chains, sales representatives in Greece. However, most dairy
companies, even very small ones, manage to export through their relational networks, although the volumes are
very low. Some also participate in fairs and exhibitions to promote their products abroad.
The lack of trade promotion is confirmed by the results of the sales outlet survey (cheese, grocery stores, etc.)
in Thessaly (detailed below). The majority of owners said that the presence of local dairy products in their store
is due to their own initiative. As regards the sale of products, the majority of traders believe that the supply is
adequate and the delivery time fast enough.
Table 39 summarises the results of the survey, analysed according to the methodology by Anterasian and
Phillips (1988) on the level of improvement of the various levels of the value chain.
42
January 2014
Table 39: Level of improvement of each element of the value chain of dairy products
1
Low
level
×
×
×
Value chain level
Value selection
Value evaluation by customers
Selection of targeted customers
Value perceived by customers
Product
Distribution
Price
Advertising
Value
Sale
communication
Promotion – public relations
Value supply
2
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
3
4
5
High
level
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
One of the first levels of improvement concerns the value perceived by the consumer. The consumer buying the
product must feel sure of his choice and pay a price lower than the profit it will bring.
Another problem is the pricing policy applied: the cost of products is high due to the cost of the raw material and
poor logistics; therefore the product arrives at the end consumer at a high price while processing profits remain
low. The case of Feta is a good example: the cost of raw material (3.9 € for 4 litres of sheep’s milk) is 75% of
the price of Feta sold to wholesalers and supermarkets (5.2 €/ kg ex. taxes in barrels or metal cans), which
represent more than 85% of the quantities marketed. The retail price of supermarket Feta is between 7.5 and
8.5 €/ kg incl. taxes. Feta in brine in plastic trays (0.5 kg, 1 kg and 2 kg portions) is in turn sold at 5.8 €/ kg ex.
taxes. Finally, Feta under vacuum is sold at 7 €/ kg ex. Taxes (0.2 kg and 0.3 kg portions).
In addition, many cheesemakers mentioned the problem of late payment by the distribution network of up to
eight months, according to one processor. However, the head of a large supermarket chain said that the delays
did not exceed 90 to 100 days.
Other problems relate to the promotion and presentation of products, most of which are sold cut at the fresh
products counter in supermarkets and other large retail outlets. Promotion activities performed by the
processors are almost non-existent. The situation is the same in small outlets, such as shops specialising in
traditional cheeses, where processors could enhance their products in a more organised manner through
posters, information leaflets, free samples, etc. These actions are necessary insofar as processors themselves
recognise that there is strong competition in the market, sometimes unfair, and it is important to highlight the
specific quality and traditional ways of manufacturing their products. However, only seven of the 19 companies
surveyed, mainly medium-sized, responded that they were interested to collaborate with R&D facilities to
introduce innovations in marketing and promotion. The high cost associated with these actions seems to be an
obstacle for Thessaly SME dairies.
In conclusion, local cheese factories/ dairies were able to improve the quality of their products through their
modern facilities and strict enforcement of the ISO and HACCP systems rules and regulations. However, their
products do not reveal their local character (specific quality-related attributes of the natural environment) or the
integrated heritage value. Furthermore, the packaging and logos used do not sufficiently promote the image of
the place of production. This is confirmed by the cheese purchasing manager of one of the largest supermarket
chains in Greece, which also has the largest Greek food import companies in the U.S. and Canada and the
largest traditional Greek food store in the historical centre of Athens. The heads of other supermarket chains
have also mentioned that, despite the strong Thessaly pastoral tradition, cheese originating in the territory is not
reflected, according to the average consumer, by the taste and organoleptic characteristics which may result.
The old tradition of breeding and dairy processing seems to have disappeared from Thessaly under a
productivist agricultural system, supported by EU grants and processing modernisation/ industrialisation. Thus,
the range of products tends to decrease due to the orientation of processing to Feta PDO and other products at
the national level. Meanwhile, the specific quality linked to the place of production gives way to a standardised
taste. Thus, although they source dairy products and cheeses from large companies in the region and enjoy the
high-quality standard, distributors find that, in the current state, Thessaly "has nothing to say particular" about its
local products due to the lack of a coordinated promotion strategy.
43
January 2014
LOCAL, NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS
The marketing networks and systems of Thessalian processing companies’ differ according to their size (Table
40).
SOHOs and SMEs surveyed primarily promote their products locally and regionally in supermarkets, creameries
and small outlets, as well as nationally in large supermarket chains. They also export, but alone and in limited
quantities. On the national market, processing units deliver small qualities of their finished products with their
own trucks (one to two vehicles), which increases the cost of transport due to the small size of orders
(especially local orders). The transport rates for small and large orders, especially for remote areas, are also
high. Locally, cheesemakers deliver their products directly to retailers without intermediaries. This is an asset
that strengthens the bonds of trust between traders and cheese. Export is expensive for most SMEs and
represents a significant economic risk.
Major regional units (not included in the sample), in addition to their correct position in the regional market, sell
most of their production to large supermarket chains highlighting their strengths: sufficient quantities of regular
deliveries and standardised quality. They also sell their products through wholesalers and other types of
businesses, and are present on international markets, including Europe and America. Similarly, the large Greek
dairy industries based in Thessaly, such as OLYMPOS, distribute their products themselves across the country
to all kinds of outlets from large supermarkets to small shops, bakeries and convenience stores with a private
fleet of refrigerated trucks of all sizes. They also have storage facilities and transhipment systems with modern
equipment and computerised management systems. In addition, they use the services of either wholesalers or
local representatives to reach remote areas and areas difficult to access. They may also appeal to the 3PL
(Third Party Logistics). These large dairies operate at a supra-local level and do not develop territorial links.
They do not communicate the Thessaly identity of the products or inter-sectoral cooperation.
Volume of processed milk
(in tonnes/year- sheep’s milk equivalent)
Table 40: Products and types of cheese factory/ dairy marketing surveyed in Thessaly
Units
surveyed
No. of
product
s
> 8,000
1
6
2,6808,000
2
3
1,6002,680
3
4
4001,600
< 400
8
5
5
5
Type of marketing
in Greece




















Supermarkets
Wholesalers
Supermarkets
Wholesalers
Supermarkets
Wholesalers
Retailers
Artisanal manufacturers
of cheese puffs
Supermarkets
Wholesalers
Retailers
Local stores
Local outlets
Own outlets
Artisanal manufacturers
of cheese puffs
Local sores
Delicatessens
Local outlets
Own outlets
Taverns
% export
units
100%
50%
Type of access to
export




Sales representatives
International fairs
Personal contacts
International fairs
100%
 Personal contacts
 Sales representatives
38%
 International fairs
through the Greek
consular
-
-
To explore the position and image of the Thessaly cheeses on the market, managers of food stores were
interviewed: 16 creameries, grocery stores and convenience store managers in Thessaly, the head of the third
largest supermarket chain in Greece (founded in Athens in 1953 and has a strong tradition of selling typical
Greek cheeses or import) and the owner of a supermarket of typical food products from all over Greece located
in the centre of Athens.
The survey revealed that very small and small cheese factories penetrate better than large ones in local outlets
(creameries, supermarkets) and retain a loyal clientele. Two thirds of the creamery providers are very small
processing units. The initiative to introduce local products comes back to retailers and not to cheese factories. In
some cases, traders choose a product in response to consumer demands. Of the 16 surveyed, 15 responded
that the most important criterion in their choice of suppliers was the quality of the product, 11 highlighted their
44
January 2014
personal relationships with cheese factories and only three cited the price (Figure 4). The local origin of the
products also seems to play a role in their choice.
Figure 4: Criteria for the selection of suppliers by traders
Despite the crisis, the demand has not been particularly affected. Products that resist the best are those of small
and very small units, due to the loyalty of their customers. Although the quantities purchased are lower,
customers are numerous. With the crisis, consumers judge the quality/ price ratio and tend to turn to local
labels. One grocery store out of the 16 traders surveyed mentioned having replaced Feta by "white cheese"
while four creameries reported an increased number and amount of typical products in their store. Traders
believe that prices are fair considering the quality of local products (prices may be even higher in some cases).
However, some believe that the standardised products of the major national food groups are expensive
compared to the quality offered. However, even if the price matches the quality, cheeses are increasingly
difficult to include in the household budget. Traders believe they are in competition, and unfairly, with
supermarket chains and multinationals. They survive thanks to a loyal customer base that knows the origin and
recognises the quality of the product. It is then a territorialised system of production and marketing.
On the other hand, interviews with major distributors showed their indifference to typical local products, and
more broadly the SMEs. This indifference is not only due to availability issues in quantity and regularity of
deliveries but also, and especially, to the fact that they cater to a wide audience with quality products and
standardised tastes. Therefore, there is no room in their line-up for new PGI certified products around which an
identity and image should be built. So, they simply buy from medium and large cheese factories/ dairies in
Thessaly Feta PDO cheese and other national reputed cheeses, such as Kasseri and/ or Manouri, as well as
sub-products, such as Anthotyro.
The owner of a large Athenian store selling Greek local products was interested by the prospect of a Thessaly
cluster of typical dairy products. It acknowledges the specific quality of local products and is wary of mass
production by large industries based on a strategy of economies of scale.
In summary, Thessalian SOHO and SME dairies seem to have reliable outlets and development opportunities in
local and regional markets (including the catering and tourism market), as well as the export markets (including
Feta PDO). Large national companies are major suppliers to supermarkets because they handle large volumes
of cheese and other traditional dairy products of standardised quality, such as Feta, Kasseri, Graviera, Manouri,
etc. The increasing demand on foreign markets for typical Greek products, such as Feta PDO and drained
yoghurt, leave much scope for all professionals in the dairy chain to expand their markets, provided they have
sufficient production capacities, specific quality linked to origin (natural and cultural resources, image of the area
of production), marketing skills and inter-professional collaborations.
2.2.2. Public and private support to the dairy chain
SUPPORT FEATURES
According to Porter (1998), a dairy chain is based on core activities and supporting activities, with the aim of
creating value and a competitive advantage 27. The activities include supporting the various links in the chain
(farms, dairy and cheese companies, dairy product retail, etc.) in the areas detailed below.

Company management
The gap between large companies and SMEs is significant in this area: unlike large companies, SMEs are not
supported on planning systems and development goals. The lack of entrepreneurial culture and cooperation
27
http://www.strategy-train.eu - Small Enterprise Strategic Development Training.
45
January 2014
between actors blocks the transmission of knowledge and know-how developed in research and education,
except when isolated and random.
Funding for dairy companies is either on equity or subsidies from government programmes. Modernisation
efforts have produced visible results. Quality management remains a priority for most companies. These seek to
implement integrated systems of quality management (ISO, HACCP) from the collection of raw materials to the
preparation of finished products.
Support for dairy enterprises in entrepreneurship is provided by the Chambers of Commerce and Industry and
the Association of Business and Industry of Thessaly (SVET) and focuses on training, promotion and
networking. These actions are not systematic or coordinated as they depend on external funding. In terms of
promotion, they are often limited to information on trade fairs organised in Greece or abroad. Networking efforts
affect both processing units and farmers, and concern the definition and monitoring of rules and obligations
(quality agreements, producer groups, etc.).
Finally, the accounting, financial and legal support of local dairy units is entrusted to private actors, such as
accountants, business advisers and lawyers, which shows the absence of public support services for
companies.

Human resources management
Thessaly dairy companies, due to their small size, are run by a small number of people, most of who are within
the family circle of the owner-manager. In livestock breeding, the presence of trained youths is becoming more
frequent. In cheese/ dairy companies, both owners and employees are trained and specialised.
One of the main problems of this dairy chain is the lack of staff training and education. While structures such as
DEMETER OGEEKA form and inform the rural population on technical issues, their work has been devalued in
recent years due to reduced funding. In addition, training on marketing techniques, the adoption of new
technologies and production processes remains incomplete.
Continuous training of processing and trade companies is provided by private training centres (ΚΕΚ) or by
organisations, such as the Association of Business and Industry of Thessaly (SVET) or the Chamber of
Commerce and Industry (more rarely).

Technological development
Recent progress has been made by Thessaly dairy units to modernise their facilities, imposed by Greek
legislation and the increased needs they felt. Most of these were covered by co-funded programmes28
encouraging companies to rethink their production systems by developing new technologies and using
innovative and environmentally friendly technologies.
However, companies invest little in research, development or production re-planning. For example, despite the
need to improve the conditioning and packaging of dairy products, no action has been taken in this direction in
most processing units.

Supplies
To address the emerging needs of production, companies are forced to modernise their facilities and
equipment. Thus, livestock farms are dependent on two milking machine import companies. For their part,
processors and retail dairy products have the choice between several companies producing equipment in the
country.
In terms of raw milk, small businesses, through their relationships with farmers, have an opportunity to control
the supply. Control is more difficult in larger units whose supply radius is wider.
Finally, for packing materials, large processing units have a competitive advantage over smaller ones because
they can develop economies of scale.
INSTITUTIONS AND SERVICES
The investigation revealed that the organisation and functioning of public services are penalised by the slow
administrative restructuring of Greece. The reform of 2010, which established Thessaly as a regional authority,
has also intensified personnel reduction. Nevertheless, the region has a comprehensive institutional and
regulatory framework and has almost all the services necessary to support the various links in the dairy chain,
including the primary link. The actors in these public institutions are numerous and active.
28
Under the Development Act, the Regional Operational Programme (PEP), the National Strategic Framework, the "Alexandros Mpaltatzis"
Rural Development Programme.
46

January 2014
Thessaly Region services
The Thessaly Region is involved in the dairy chain through the services of the Directorate General (DG) of the
rural and veterinary economics and the DG of development, which apply existing policy and regulations, acting
alone or in collaboration with other organisations. They contribute to:

The recovery of pastures: public notice on the right of pasture use, compliancy, capacity to accommodate
animals, ownership;

The operation of livestock farms: animal health controls, management and implementation of rural
development programmes on the modernisation of farms, the adoption of agro-environmental measures,
organic farming, etc.;

The production and control of feed produced and distributed: administrative control and fraud control of
fodder production companies by supervisors, in cooperation with the three EKKYZ;

The operation of dairies and companies marketing feed products: licensing operating companies involved,
controls of the conditions of production and marketing of dairy products with the Hellenic Feed Authority
(EFET).
The whey management board of the Thessaly Region monitors and controls the management of waste from
dairy farms in the region and acts to solve treatment and whey recovery issues to avoid environmental
problems.

Local authorities
Local authorities, through the Office of Rural Development, intervene at the level of:

The recovery of pastures: granting occupancy rights to pastures, improved infrastructure (rural roads,
drinking troughs, etc.);

The functioning of farms: cooperation with public services, particularly in terms of information.

Control services
Control services perform analyses of the different parts of the dairy chain:

Genetic improvement of animal: the Animal Genetic Improvement Centre of Karditsa (KGBZ), a
decentralised service of the Ministry of Agriculture (YAAT), implements breeding programmes in
collaboration with cooperatives of pure-bred sheep and goats;

Fodder production: testing and fodder distribution laboratories of Larissa (EEKYZ), under the Ministry of
Agriculture, are responsible for the proper implementation of the national fodder production and transport
control programme. Samples are chemically analysed and are dispatched to programme supervisors
(DAYOK - DG of rural and veterinary economics) and/ or national or international accredited laboratories to
solve any issues related to toxins, remaining pesticides, heavy metals, traceability of genetically modified
fodder etc.;

Operation of livestock farms: the Hellenic milk and meat organisation (ELOGAK), under the Ministry of
Agriculture, monitors the quality of the milk produced (adulteration, microbes, toxins and urea) and informs
producers on the purity of their milk and their livestock productivity;

Operation of dairies and food shops: the Greek Food Authority, in partnership with DAYOK and the
veterinary laboratory, ensures compliance with HACCP and ISO standards and the harmonisation of milk
quality, and performs controls on milk and dairy products (cheese, yoghurt), and DNA controls as well as
veterinary drug residue and animal-based feed mixture controls, in cooperation with the veterinary
laboratory of Larissa, a decentralised service of the Ministry of agriculture.

Research and education structures
National research structures installed in Thessaly have a numerous specialised and qualified personnel, and
conduct research focused on the various dairy chains of the dairy chain:

Pastures/ fodder: ETHIAGE, Institute of plants for animal feed, conducts applied research on fodder
(introduction of new improved varieties, etc.) and pastures (grassland management techniques, etc.);

Training/ education: the training centres of the Greek Dimitra agriculture organisation, within the DG of
education and training, are responsible for training and educating the rural population on the Ministry of
agriculture programmes and the region concerned;
47
January 2014

Research: the University of Thessaly (research units and laboratories and the Polytechnic Faculty, Faculty
of Agricultural Sciences and the Faculty of Health Sciences) and the Institute of Technology of Larissa
(departments of plant production, animal production and food technology), through their qualified scientific
personnel, conducting research on the production of fodder and food ration on the health and reproduction
of animals, production and safety of dairy products and the technological innovation and management of
dairy companies.

Information, support and networking organisations
In Thessaly, several organisations conduct information campaigns, and provide support and networking
amongst various actors in the dairy chain:

Livestock farms: chambers of commerce and industry, and development agencies fund livestock projects
and carry out information and awareness campaigns for farmers on the implementation of integrated
management systems, development networking and starting a processing business;

Producer organisations (ThESgala, ThESgi, etc.) defend the grievances of their members while ensuring
the quality of their products through the establishment of rules. Thus, they control the quality of milk, provide
technical assistance for improvement, manage the supply of fodder and tools, control fodder quality, take
actions for the decrease in production costs and negotiate the selling price through contracts established
with the dairy industry;

Dairy companies and animal feed stores, chambers of commerce and industry and, development agencies
fund projects of these companies and support the implementation of quality systems, targeted information
campaigns, training, consultancy and business awareness on networking and funding sources for
modernisation and promotion of their activity (OPAACH, LEADER European programmes);

Consumers: consumer unions, which are voluntary organisations, disseminate information aimed at
protecting consumers.
CONCLUSION
The current support system from the state and local government structures covers all areas of application of the
development policies in the dairy chain. However, this system is not effective because of the lack of applications
and information caused by the reduction of human scientific potential (despite qualified staff) and financial
resources. In knowledge and innovation, the results are limited even though Thessaly has a network of
structures to support all levels of the industry. The national and regional coordination of the support to marketing
systems also presents weaknesses in the organisation of political marketing. Chambers of commerce and
industry, and producer and traders organisations try to overcome these shortcomings, but the actions conducted
do not specifically target the dairy chain.
The main problem lies in the lack of a unified structure and an overall response (surveys, transfer of know-how,
expert advice, etc.) that would promote cooperation and exchanges between regional actors (R&D, public
services, consular services, private services, etc.). Following the privatisation of industry advisory services, the
public system now only carries out bureaucratic activities, such as monitoring and management of European
aid, and it has lost vital points of direct contact with producers and entrepreneurs. This loss is partly filled by
private consultancy and advisory offices. The current problem is related to inefficient interaction between the
public and private centres of the support and advice system. The lack of integration of productive units to a
single effective advice, support and R&D system has a negative impact on the cooperation between the
different actors in the chain and its overall operation. This problem intensifies with the discontinuity of funding
and support for business projects, initially due to the crisis, so that actions are often fragmentary and without
results. This discontinuity reduces the reliability of the system and jeopardises compliance with the
specifications of quality products.
Regarding R&D, the survey revealed a lack of accompanying measures to develop research, promote its result
and disseminate them to companies. There is also a lack of programme coordination of comparative research
on rural areas, especially on industries related to dairy chain activities. Meanwhile, the means established for
regrouping and training researchers regionally are sporadic and uncoordinated. The need for an institution
capable of organising and disseminating research results is very real. Creating the conditions necessary to
encourage cooperation between research centres and training for the benefit of dairy companies helps to
overcome the barriers identified.
Thessaly has not yet managed to gather, in the very dynamic, national business that is the dairy chain, a critical
mass of resources and expertise to strengthen its position in the global economic competition. Although the
creation of a centre of expertise has already been proposed in the past, these efforts have not yet had
significant results. The lack of an innovation and cooperation centre with companies contributes to the lack of
48
January 2014
coordination and focus of research on the Thessaly dairy chain. Insufficient coordination between the numerous
support structures and their non-participation in the projects aimed at the creation of a centre of expertise
aggravates this situation.
Concerning support services and research, we can conclude that:

In terms of agriculture and livestock, establishing mechanisms for public awareness and support, and
encouraging the development of R&D units in the region would improve production systems, including the
quality of raw milk and regularity of deliveries to processing units;

In the dairy chain, skilled resources in processing technology, engineering, computer science, management,
etc. are plentiful. In contrast, high-level skills in R&D are still insufficient, which does not encourage the
development of research and joint activities, such as conferences.
2.2.3. Strengths and weaknesses of the Thessaly dairy chain
The SWOT analysis describes the strengths and weaknesses of a dairy chain while evaluating opportunities
and threats likely to influence its development. The intersection between strengths and opportunities reveals the
strengths of the dairy chain and its growth prospects in the medium term. As for weaknesses and threats, they
represent constraints on which actors should work to create opportunities.
UPSTREAM OF THE DAIRY CHAIN

Territory: preservation of territorial links and the quality of soils, and improvement of productivity to meet the
demand of the dairy chain and attract young farmers;

Genetic improvement29: maintenance and improvement of local breeds to fight against introduced breeds
and strengthen the distinctive products;

Power: improvement and support of the joint Thessaly/ Mediterranean feeding system based on grazing,
fodder and feed concentrates production with particular attention to quality and the territorial dimension
(proximity between production and consumption);

Ration: feed rations adapted to the animal and the herd to increase lactation while reducing production
costs through a quality and territorial anchorage strategy.
DOWNSTREAM OF THE DAIRY CHAIN

Dairies/ cheese factories: use of the qualitative and territorial characteristics of dairy products through the
promotion of an authentic and distinct Thessaly identity;

Trade and export: search for a balance between the requirements of large distribution networks and
promotion of the Thessaly dairy products identity ;

Related industries: strengthening cooperation between the dairy chain and the food and pharmaceutical
industries, with an innovation and biotechnology epicentre;

Structures and mechanisms: creation of a framework for cooperation and exploitation of research results
between research centres, industrial enterprises and intermediary support structures;

Dairy chain: strengthening the competitiveness and diversification of markets while maintaining the quality,
authenticity and the territorial dimension of production.
ASSETS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THESSALY DAIRY CHAIN

Large concentration of sheep and goat livestock, as well as dairy companies (real dairy pool);

High production capacities of the 75 dairies in the region, which have modern facilities;

Close and traditional relations between farmers and processors in small territorial units;

Research centres and services covering all areas of the industry;

Educated and trained human capital;

Wide range of markets for the products of the dairy chain;
29
The "second order" objectives on increasing competitiveness through productivity gains in the upstream sector (farms) were included
because of the importance of a) local semi-extensive system in the cost, quality and identity of local dairy products b) the loyalty of the
Greek market.
49
January 2014

Strong recognition of Feta;

National/ regional gastronomic tradition giving prominence to dairy products;

Emergence of synergies between dairy companies, related industries and research laboratories;

Territorial anchoring and specificity of resources determining the quality and authenticity of dairy products;

Capacity for the adoption of regulations concerning good environmental practices and traceability;

Local, regional and national market loyalty for Feta and preference for regional sales outlets for small, local
cheese factories;

Growing demand for Feta and Greek yoghurt in international markets;

Reorientation of the regional intensive agricultural system to fodder, favourable to the development of
animal breeding;

Distribution networks established at different market levels, including short circuits;

The new CAP.
CONSTRAINTS TO INCLUDE IN A RESISTANCE STRATEGY

Low intensity collaboration and synergies between dairy companies and related industries;

High costs associated with traditional distribution networks;

Lack of support for the internationalisation of enterprises despite a growing demand in foreign markets;

Liquidity problems caused by the economic and financial crisis;

Discrepancies between quality and price of dairy products;

Lack of a marketing strategy for the dairy chain;

Dominance of large retail chains in the retail trade;

Production of milk becoming insufficient due to the increasing demand for dairy products abroad;

Low bargaining power of Thessaly companies against major retail chains;

Lack of effective professional organisations and cooperatives to rebalance the relationship between the
different links in the chain (for example, knowledge of the fodder trade by carriers);

Deficit of agricultural extension services;

Lack of a regional centre of expertise and innovation;

Emergence of cartels cooperating with major retail chains;

Lack of innovation limiting the added value of products.
TOWARDS A TERRITORIAL STRATEGY
The Thessaly dairy chain of has a dual nature, characteristic of productive systems of the Mediterranean: small
farms, strongly regionalised, and maintaining both formal and informal relations; also, a high concentration of
family-run processors, closely related to farmers in small dairy pools and flexible enough to penetrate different
markets (local and international). The field survey and SWOT analysis reveal the dilemma facing the Thessaly
dairy chain: maintaining its local roots and revealing its specificities, or seeking productivity gains through
economies of scale. This dilemma could lead to a dichotomy between small and large actors.
Given the structural and relational characteristics of the dairy chain, and the results of the field survey and
SWOT analysis, it would be appropriate for Thessaly to adopt a territorial strategy with the following objectives:

Strengthen the quality model to develop a strategy to avoid relying on specific assets of the territory and a
cross-sectoral and multidimensional territorial governance system;

Support the industry through a territorial approach reconciling competitive advantage and differentiation;

Develop the territory as an innovation device by combining concentration and proximity, thus encouraging
social and territorial relations.
50
January 2014
Figure 5: Porter analysis applied to Thessaly
TERRITORY
Productivity
3
2
Lower cost
Terroirs
1
Distinctive products
4
COMPETITIVENESS
Thus, the connection between organisational proximity and geographical proximity facilitates the emergence of
a territorial model of the organisation of actors. The development of a sustainable strategy based on quality
must be based on the interactions and interdependencies between the dairy chain and Thessaly around two
main areas: a) planning and competitiveness and b) productivity and territory. Area a) stimulates these
interactions through cooperation, actions, innovations and training; area b) aims to achieve a balance between
the specificities linked to productivity and territory, enabled by new technologies and techniques.
However, the major innovation would be to achieve competitiveness and growth by two entries: a) research and
techniques for reducing production costs (and therefore increasing productivity); b) identification of resources
with highly specific and distinctive characters, not transferable or reproducible, and usable as raw material or
the final product.
2.2.4. Priorities proposed by the different actors
The findings of the SWOT analysis helped actors to better understand the determinants for the future of the
Thessaly dairy chain, its positioning and its relationship with its external environment.
AGREEMENTS AND CONFRONTATIONS
The main problem that the diagnosis faced was the difficulty in making the processors deviate from their microchannels and their personal and family itineraries. These processors, including large companies, expressed
reluctance about possible cooperation as part of an integrated strategy, with a coordination structure that would
focus downstream of the chain. They are, however, aware of their dependence on farmers for compliance with
the specifications of PDO products and the development of the milk supply. Another dispute that seems to
oppose small processors to large companies concerns milk collection.
The weaknesses of the dairy chain, the priorities proposed by actors and the ambitions of each one’s priorities
were expressed without major confrontations between them. However, divergent views and objections arose
regarding not the idea, but the form of the grouping to adopt: partnership or cooperative.
Mistrust of farmers and processors concerning the cooperative form is certainly related to lack of contacts and
especially the weakness of support and innovation structures, and networks on issues requiring a more
significant critical mass. The individualism of processors aggravates this situation. In the absence of
professional organisation, the dairy chain is capable of guiding research activities towards the objectives
targeted by its actors and furthering innovation.
The lack of support structures and cooperation is also a problem for the diversification of dairy products. Indeed,
processors and distributors have expressed their willingness and ability to take into account new consumer
trends that emphasise "healthy" food and traditional products, and meet the new strategies of the major dairy
groups established in Greece, and the competition of countries producing low cost, "Feta" type cheeses.
Differences between small and large companies concern the importance given to the territorial dimension of the
chain. Small entrepreneurs consider it crucial to comply with the regulations of PDO products and increase the
added value of their products. They seek the protection of productive and territorial support of their leading
product, Feta PDO, and the development of a strategy to consolidate its position on international markets. The
largest companies state that they are hampered by the terms of the PDO specifications, which they regard as a
constraint due to the asymmetry between the supply of milk defined by regulations and the growing demand for
the finished product.
51
January 2014
Indeed, upstream of the dairy chain, extensive, traditional and organised small-scale dairy pools have difficulty
in following the dynamic and ambitious growth targets of large companies, increasingly incorporated into
international markets. However, the increase in added-value products, including Feta PDO, seems to be one of
the answers to this asymmetry. Production productivity and competitiveness would increase, based on new
technologies, territorial specificities and innovation.
However, all actors recognise the need to establish a centre of expertise and innovation as a prerequisite to any
effort to develop strategies and action plans for the dairy chain. This division also facilitates support initiatives,
and individual and group projects.
PRIORITIES

Supporting the sheep and goat farming system, supporting the production of Feta
The first strategic priority on which all parties agree is the importance of strengthening the role of Feta based on
the PDO regulations, strengthening the links of the production system with the territory and meeting the quantity
and quality expected by the market, in short, demonstrating the territorial dimension of production. This is
therefore an increase of the supply of quality milk to meet the PDO specifications. The supply growth also
avoids competition between small and large companies for milk collection. Representatives of public services
and research centres having demonstrated the possibility of improving the productivity of livestock, especially
small, local breed ruminants, breeders and processors have agreed to:

Ensure quantity, territorial anchorage and quality of milk supply through:
-
A gradual increase in the productivity of milked females by genetic improvement of local breeds and feed
rations based on local resources;
Payment and funding operations facilitation for the supply of fodder and feed concentrates;
Improve control systems and evaluation of the quality of milk by companies to regain farmer’s trust.

Improve the installation conditions for young farmers by:
-
Enhance the breeding potential of the region and its tangible and intangible characteristics with the aim of
increasing productivity and the milk supply;
Introduce incentives for extensive systems;
Promote integrated small-scale dairy pool projects;
Create effective and capable support structures to support the installation of breeders.

Repositioning the industry on current and new markets

Better manage the market demand and diversification
Diversification of markets, local to international, is an advantage for the dairy chain, but requires effective and
efficient management. Increased penetration of international markets therefore requires better regulation of the
supply over demand from major distribution channels (entrepreneurs and distributors).

Diversify dairy products around the product leader, Feta PDO
The majority of actors agree on the need to orient the diversification of dairy products to a new type, such as
alicaments, and strengthen cooperation with related industries. This orientation implies:
-
Identifying and developing new products and markets;
Adopting a strategy based on the creation of a range of products around Feta;
Relaying R&D centres and companies to introduce innovations and improve knowledge;
Exploring new markets with new products developed in collaboration with related industries and research
centres (industrialisation of traditional dishes).

Improving marketing activities
The weakness of marketing activities is highlighted by all the actors surveyed. Entrepreneurs have difficulties in
valuing their products in new international markets and strengthening their presence in existing markets.
Promotion activities are sometimes organised, such as participation in international fairs, but do not fit into a
long-term strategy. Improvement of product marketing therefore involves:
-
Strengthening the bargaining power of companies with major distributors;
Improving business resources;
Facilitating cooperation between small companies and supermarkets.
52

January 2014
Cooperating to create a critical mass and/ or economies of scale
The various actors do not agree on the issue of cooperation. However, the investigation revealed specific and
urgent needs, particularly in the following areas:

Better control the product packaging link
This is to better understand the demand for contractors to adapt packaging and the design.

Reduce the cost of transporting products
Transport costs for dairy products are very high because each company delivers its products itself. This problem
is expressed mainly by small companies.

Work with actors in the dairy chain and related industries included in the Thessaly dairy chain borderlands
Such cooperation would bring together the significant industrial and artisanal food potential of Thessaly.

Facilitate access to credit and investment
Forming partnerships facilitates the search for effective ways to access funding sources and reabsorb the
liquidity problem due to the crisis that affects all links in the chain. Upstream, the problem arises from the
absence of contracts between farmers, fodder producers and processors, while downstream, this problem
hinders investment and export.

Develop a marketing strategy to increase the added value products while ensuring their
competitiveness
The actors agree on the need to preserve the quality, authenticity and identity of dairy products without
specifying how to do it together. Distributors in turn pointed out the fact that Thessaly has no "milk and cheese
identity" recognised in international markets. Faced with these challenges, it is necessary to:
-
-
Overcome individualism and develop marketing strategies and promotion;
Build the Thessaly dairy identity to meet the "non-distinctiveness" of its products, particularly in international
markets;
Better use the territory and milk product specificities by highlighting the image of the land and extensive
sheep and goat production systems based on quality and traceability;
Face competition from products of the same type, but of lower quality and price, especially from
neighbouring countries;
Compensate by the market cost of maintaining the quality of the dairy products;
Obtain PDO certification for Greek yoghurt;
Increase consumer awareness.

Develop efficient structures for coordination, support and innovation
-
Small companies are more favourable than others to cooperation between businesses, chambers of commerce
and research and training centres, including:

Establishment of a regional centre of expertise
This centre would aim to unite the support structures, development agencies, cooperatives and networks
around individual and collective projects. It would cover the entire Thessaly food dairy chain and contribute to
the improvement of advice and support for new technologies, management, marketing and distribution of
products.

Improve the innovation capacity in the Thessaly dairy chain
A regional centre of innovation would provide technical, regulatory and commercial information on the food and
dairy chain, and propose solutions to small companies on identified areas of innovation so that they gradually
adopt an approach to innovation, with an aim to:
-
Guide and coordinate research activities towards the goals targeted by the dairy chain and to innovation;
Create new products based on innovation and new technologies;
Create the conditions and means to attract investment in the region;
Improve the attractiveness of the Thessaly dairy chain for highly qualified professionals.
53

January 2014
Strengthen the territorial nature of the dairy chain and its sustainable contribution to the rural
economy
This priority is proposed by local authorities (demes and the region), as well as all entrepreneurs surveyed. It
involves:
-
Strengthening the links with the dairy pools to the dairy chain through multi-sectoral projects;
Keep small livestock farms and dairies while making them competitive;
Develop the dairy chain’s relations with related Thessaly industries in targeted areas (food, medicinal plants,
biotechnology, etc.).
The priorities identified by actors in a more or less consensual manner clearly show the need to reposition the
industry in a national and international context, and the need for a critical mass and effective support structures
to solve major problems by appropriate actions. These priorities can be divided into four main themes:

The territorial dimension;

Access to new markets;

Ad hoc cooperation;

Support and coordination structures.
The cluster strategy should therefore incorporate these priorities.
2.3. The dairy cluster project
2.3.1. Opportunity to create a dairy cluster in Thessaly
The concept of the cluster is relatively unclear. The opportunity to create such a structure depends on the
strengths and weaknesses of the industry concerned, the objectives of its actors and their willingness to
reposition the industry in a regional, national and international environment. Thus, the ultimate goal is to explore
new opportunities that strengthen the position and development of the dairy chain. In the case of the Thessaly
dairy chain, this objective is in a context of an increasingly open market and increased competition. This context
is determined by the objectives and regulations of the European Union, and indirectly by the decisions of the
WTO, as well as new consumer trends and technology.
International markets are characterised by hyper-segmentation to meet the demand growth and differentiation of
consumer tastes and preferences. Although they do not have the level of diversification and specialisation found
in France for traditional products, the countries of northern Europe control the market, especially that of milk,
butter and milk powder. Currently, these countries are investing using technology in the production and
marketing of specific products (probiotics, pharmaceuticals, aromatic, etc.). Imitation and puns on the name of
the Greek dairy products (Fetta instead of Feta, Salakis) and the use of cheap milk for the manufacture of
similar products by neighbouring countries represent other forms of competition.
CHALLENGES FOR THE THESSALY DAIRY CHAIN
Firstly, the Thessaly dairy chain has all the characteristics that meet the definition of a cluster: spatial
concentration (agglomeration) of jobs and production activities, and dairy processing, as well as transversal
activities (packaging, logistics, marketing, R&D, agri-services, etc.) and scientific and financial support
structures (administrative, services, etc.). These characteristics are located and organised in a favour of
proximity to cooperation and synergies with the main objective to promote innovation and development.
The key success factors lie within the dairy chain and within its relations with the markets. Thessaly has a great
tradition of quality and authenticity, a significant amount of raw material, a trend towards modernisation of units
and a breeding ground for young trained entrepreneurs who hold family or ancestral expertise. The dairy chain
is also characterised by a high level of market penetration, despite the absence of a collective strategy. The
existence of a common culture and an appropriate structural environment (regulation, institutions and
infrastructure) facilitate the creation of a regional cluster.
Despite these favourable factors, cooperation within the dairy chain and in its immediate environment is limited.
The only observable relations are strong traditional links between farmers and processors and between the
local/ regional sales outlets and small companies. The national environment is another factor blocking the dairy
chain. Indeed, the country implements ongoing reforms in administration and local governance, but which are
only effective in the medium term. Due to budget restrictions, services are restructured, but despite
decentralisation, they still depend on central administration, which is the Ministry of Rural Development and
54
January 2014
Food. Other inhibiting factors include the quasi-dissolution of the cooperative dairy chain, weakening of the
Chambers of Commerce and Industry, lack of collaboration between research centres and companies, and the
absence of a culture of partnership amongst the agri-processing companies in general, and particularly in the
dairy chain.
Meanwhile, the instinctive marketing and euphoria caused by the demand for Feta PDO is no longer sufficient to
cope with rapidly changing markets and consumer expectations, and domination by retail supermarkets. It is
therefore crucial to build in the shortest possible time, competitiveness based on the territorial specificity of dairy
products.
Thessaly dairy products, like the vast majority of Greek products, are characterised by a strong, Greek and
Mediterranean image, which assimilates food and health. This image is strong because it responds
simultaneously to two food market trends: authentic traditional and functional health; however, this picture is not
mobilised for the creation of a territorial brand promoting Thessaly. Maintaining the quality and authenticity
deeply rooted in the territory will be an asset to the Thessaly dairy chain if it manages to offset the cost involved
and promote this specificity amongst consumers. Feta is a PDO product at national level and is not exclusively
representative of Thessaly. To build its own identity and better present it to consumers, the dairy chain needs
information about its environment, innovation and research of which it must share the cost.
Thus, the role of research, new technologies, innovation and training is crucial. The success of the dairy chain
can only be guaranteed only through networking of the multiple research centres available to the Thessaly and
cooperation between the different actors.
Finally, the need to sustainably meet the specifications of PDO products, to increase the quantity and quality
supply of raw milk, to highlight more effectively the identity of Thessaly dairy products and to promote them on
the world markets world requires both horizontal and vertical coordination for two reasons: the dairy product is
closely linked to public goods and thus territorial, and the industry needs new technologies and innovative ideas.
The same needs are felt at the diversification of products, including functional food that incorporates the results
of research and new technologies.
These weaknesses, resulting from the structure of the relational system of the industry (Porter diamond), weigh
heavily on the future, including that of SMEs. However, the creation of a dairy cluster would allow the latter to
benefit from agglomeration economies and other advantages, such as access to information and capital,
knowledge transfer, job-sharing of qualified professionals, etc. These benefits could help reduce their costs,
increase productivity, better organise their marketing channels and improve their national and international
competitiveness.
OPPORTUNITIES IN MARKET DIVERSITY
The opportunities to create a dairy cluster are primarily related to the growing demand, which extends to related
areas and can form the basis for new economic activities, such as the manufacture of functional food. Demand
is driven by new foreign markets, such as China, as well as niche markets geared to specific products. Indeed,
the consumption of specific quality products is rapidly changing, and the Thessaly dairy chain consolidates its
position by satisfying the search for authenticity and food-health consumers.
In addition to the growth in global demand for dairy products, Greece enjoys the strong recognition of Feta
abroad, as well as the boom of "Greek" yoghurt on the U.S. and British markets. These present visible and
promising opportunities.
However, the Thessaly dairy chain should not focus on foreign markets at the expense of the national market
because the Greeks are the biggest consumers of cheese in the world and pay particular attention to the
specific characteristics of dairy products. Moreover, globalisation increases competition within the Greek
market, which attracts more and more foreign companies. With an average consumption of dairy products of 12
kg/ person/ year, which is three times more than the global average, the Greek market could indeed be valued
at 30 million consumers. Thus, the industry must be able to manage two distinct markets: the Greek market,
which remains attached to traditional characteristics of dairy products including Feta, and international markets
on which a continuous monitoring is needed to understand the new trends.
Compared to other dairy chains, the dairy market is less complex because it focuses mainly on cheeses.
However, the growing demand for yoghurt and alicaments expands and complicates the domestic market.
Finally, in terms of distribution, Thessaly has a clear advantage because it supplies all categories of retail, local
dairies and supermarket chains, without applying any well-defined marketing strategy.
Nevertheless, growth in demand for dairy products and the development of presence on international markets
create competition requiring innovation and marketing capacities and adequate distribution structures. The
creation of a dairy cluster could help better meet these requirements through coordination, cooperation and
support structures.
55
January 2014
Thessaly has significant assets to support initiatives around the cluster concept. Highlighting these assets must
be a priority in the cluster, as well as the removal of obstacles that represent the structural weaknesses 30 of the
dairy chain. Finally, the initiative to create a Thessaly dairy cluster would benefit from the centrality of the
groups, networking and forming partnerships within the objectives and funding of the CAP and EU support
programmes.
2.3.2. Priority objectives
Despite the differences of views and reserves about the potential success of a Thessalian dairy cluster, the
persons surveyed agree on:

A general objective: the pulse of a new dynamic and strategic direction for the dairy chain;

A vision of sustainable development and prosperity of the Thessaly dairy chain by combining innovative
developments maintaining its territorial character;

A main mission: to create structures that meet the needs in capacity, skill and innovation of all links in the
chain and promote the emergence of greater cooperation.
In the definition of the priority objectives of the cluster, its dual function has been highlighted:

Support companies and their collaborations by accompanying their projects;

Ensure the organisation and development of the cluster itself.
Diagnostic results and priorities proposed by the actors allow a better identification of the cluster’s priorities.
CREATION OF A FAVOURABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR DAIRY INNOVATION

Creation of a centre of innovation;

Attraction of researchers and high-level experts;

Mobilisation of external funding, increasingly difficult to find and justify;

Adoption of a joint action plan for research and technological development in the areas of traceability (DNA
barcoding), DNA fingerprinting in food (database), packaging, etc.;

Development of relations with related industries;

Creation of new production yields by integrating new technologies related to the environment, alternative
energy, etc.
SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAIN

Creation of a centre of expertise;

Strengthening links between the various links in the chain;

Establishment of innovation projects coordinated by centres of expertise and innovation to benefit
processors, funded by national research and European programmes;

Promotion of innovative projects in upstream and downstream activities, product development, qualification
of dairy chain professionals and transfer of appropriate technologies to reconcile the improvement of the
competitiveness of the dairy chain and the promotion of specific resources of the territory;

Development of new products through cooperation between dairies and related industries.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARKET

Identification of new opportunities: create a centre for collecting information on international markets and
identifying opportunities for diversification and value addition;

Coordination of research on innovation, primarily on the marketing methods;

Development of outreach activities and promotion;

Promotion of business abroad: create a brand focusing on the production of local PDO and PGI food to
promote Thessaly.
30
Reminder: weak export activities, poor performance of distribution networks and low coherence methods of marketing on the product/
target markets, the mode of distribution and promotion methods.
56
January 2014
DEVELOPMENT OF PARTNERSHIPS IN THE DAIRY CHAIN AND WITH RELATED INDUSTRIES

Creation of meeting and exchange spaces to facilitate cooperation between processing units;

Establishment of training programmes, technical assistance, joint learning, awareness on "good practices"
and the creation of forums for discussion;

Networking of international promotion and distribution structures;

Promotion of the cooperation between dairy companies and related industries.
SUMMARY OF THE CLUSTER PRIORITIES
Taking into account the structural weaknesses of the dairy chain, support institutions and priorities proposed by
the actors, goals to achieve and actions to be performed by the cluster can be grouped into seven major
themes:

Internal dairy chain collaboration: information, primary dairy chain, transport, common strategies;

Employment and skills: attraction and training, industrial culture, differentiation related to skills;

Market development: monitoring tools, international exploration, joint product development, marketing,
marketing structures;

Business performance: optimisation of the value chain, business services, relationships with the upstream
part of the chain;

Innovation: product innovation, service innovation, cooperation with research centres, new production
yields;

Structures and mechanisms of support: networking support structures for creating a centre of expertise;

Territory: development of the territory features, resources and assets, integration of dairy products in the
“basket of goods” in the territory cooperation amongst all actors on the basis of a joint action plan.
These themes could be the subjects of working groups that the cluster will organise under its governance
structure and leadership.
2.3.3. Search for a relevant "clustering" process
The success of a cluster depends on several factors: the degree of awareness of its usefulness by companies,
the adequacy of the reasons given by the actors of the dairy chain and the specific objectives of the cluster
priorities, the means available and the type of governance adopted. This is why it is often difficult to immediately
achieve a critical mass, especially when the relationship between companies is not homogeneous. Therefore,
the implementation of a phased process is as important as the choice of cluster type and mode of governance.
Indeed, a certain maturity in the relationship between companies and other support structures is necessary for
the implementation of actions of common interest.
Several reasons explain the difficulty of achieving from the start a critical mass and a sufficient and
representative consensus of the different perspectives of actors in the dairy chain:

Coexistence of informal structures from a great tradition in dairy farming and artisanal dairies, and formal
structures, resulting from adaptation efforts more or less successful in the majority of companies;

Emerging opposition between large companies who are trying to increase their influence in the milk
production pools, and small companies that still control the supply of raw milk through their relational
networks;

Euphoria for the recognition and the demand for Feta on international markets, which does not yet take into
account the need to respect the standards related to the PDO status (EU regulations);

Lack of links and trust between entrepreneurs, particularly between small and large companies.
These must be supplemented by the results of a preliminary evaluation of the feasibility of creating a cluster in
the short term, which has brought to light the following obstacles:

Lack of specialised organisation maintaining strong relationships with companies in the dairy chain;

Lack of a collective vision;

Lack of a business leader capable of leading a development initiative integrating small dairies;
57

Lack of consulting, training and research network structures;

Lack of professional organisations and support;

Good level of skills of the labour concentrated on production tasks;

Reluctance of companies, which hinders the achievement of a critical size by the cluster.
January 2014
The situation and the conditions seem unfavourable for the immediate establishment of a dairy cluster in
Thessaly. The success of a cluster is not evaluated by the initial number of participants, nor its capacity for
development and attraction of new members; the conclusions of the consultation meetings tend towards the
establishment of a gradual process. Moreover, the regional dimension is not a prerequisite for the formation of a
cluster. It is mostly a consequence of its emergence.
Given the above weaknesses and unreceptiveness of the regional entrepreneurial culture to the idea of
cooperation at the heart of the cluster concept, a two-phase scenario seems prudent:

Phase 1: initiation and maturation of the idea of the dairy cluster, with the driving force and core of the most
"territorialised" companies;

Phase 2: creation of the cluster around a core of dairies.
2.3.4. Two-phase action plan
This scenario is based on the results of the diagnosis, which have identified a shared vision, presented above.
Well-orientated towards the future, it is in reality an initiation and maturation action due to the low maturity of the
conditions likely to "support" a partnership plan and the low number of actors that have expressed their
willingness to participate in the cluster. This plan can be adapted and refined following the progress of the dairy
cluster project.
The full participation of a large number of actors in the dairy chain and the formal creation of the cluster would
therefore be covered in a second phase, depending on the success of the first phase. However, it seems
unrealistic to expect the second phase to be completed within the LACTIMED project.
Therefore, and although it seems difficult to expedite the formation of a cluster comprising a large number of
actors and institutions, a series of actions can be taken to:

Create conditions conducive to the formation of a dairy cluster in Thessaly;

Meet the major internal and external challenges of the dairy chain.
These actions should have an immediate effect and a definite period of return on investment.
INITIATION AND MATURATION
Given the lack of experience in formal cooperation, significant differences in size between the companies and
the devaluation of the cluster concept by the failure of past initiatives, it appears more appropriate in this first
phase to limit and focus on:

Actions addressing both the intrinsic problems of the links and their impact on the industry (lack of support
structures, critical mass, etc.);

Progressive building of trust relationships, which should result in an increase over time of the number of
participants and the efficiency.
However, it is important to ensure from the outset the good representation of the cluster, its legitimation by
national, regional and local public support, the active participation of research centres and the progressive
increase in the number of dairies.
The method adopted is to act according to the links and priorities identified above. As part of the diagnosis,
partners and potential leaders were identified, including government departments, research centres, chambers
of commerce and industry, chambers of tourism, etc.
In this first phase of the action plan, a minimum of organisations and institutions is needed to clarify the roles
and obligations of each party. The action plan should include concrete actions with a delay of specific
implementation and visible short-term results (if possible), around which all territorial actors need to be
mobilised.
58
January 2014
These actions may include:

Organisation of cooperation and networks to meet the priorities identified;

Establishment of structures and actions involving technical support and research whose legitimacy is
recognised by entrepreneurs (centre of expertise, innovation and extension structure);

Invitation to processors to participate in the steering committee (without any initial commitment) to facilitate
discussions on the strengths and weaknesses of the Thessaly dairy chain and its positioning in relation to
opportunities and threats from the external environment;

Information and awareness work on issues and specific goals to promote contacts and facilitate
cooperation.
During this first phase, further cooperation actions could be initiated on the basis of priorities identified by actors
and by the diagnosis:

Establishment of a cooperation structure responsible for encouraging increased productivity while ensuring
compliance with requirements imposed by the PDO regulations;

Cooperation between an industrial group and some related processing companies to develop new products
(functional products);

Gathering of a large number of processors around common concerns, such as transport, packaging or
participation in a project on the promotion of a Thessaly breakfast in hotels (launched by the Thessaly
chamber of hoteliers).
CREATION OF A CLUSTER AROUND A CORE OF DAIRIES
The second phase corresponds to the choice of the final shape of the cluster, the adoption of the governance
mode and the establishment of a leadership structure. It will include central actions to create the cluster:

Definition of common objectives and strengthening of relations and trade;

Development of strategic relationships (partnership phase);

Development of a vision and strategy (planning phase);

Cluster implementation (mature phase).
During this phase, a structure must be created to formalise the cooperation initiated in the first phase and
ensure the continuous and independent funding of the cluster. A leader/ facilitator should also be selected to
manage the cluster and its sustainability after the LACTIMED project.
2.3.5. Resource mobilisation
Mobilisation of the available resources must follow the guidance of a strategy and an action plan within the
objectives of the cluster, providing concrete and additional steps that must include a plan for resource
mobilisation.
RESOURCES NEEDED FOR PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE CLUSTER

Human resources:
-
-
Beneficiaries (all actors in the dairy chain, especially Thessaly farmers and processors) and voluntary
members (qualified professionals and leader entrepreneurs);
Chain partners (individuals and/ or institutions providing services to the industry) and consumer
organisations;
Scientific and technical staff of the regional public services;
Opinion leaders and political lobbies in the region;
Unemployed youths and/ or graduates (veterinarians, animal scientists, agronomists, etc.) with an interest in
breeding;
High-level experts specialised in training and research facilities;
Professionals of training centres and consulting companies;
Representatives of consular chambers.

Logistics resources:
-
Own business means;
Services provided by specialised companies (equipment, organisational technology, etc.).
-
59

Technical resources:
-
Local development agencies;
Consulting companies;
Training centres and academic department programmes;
Organisations providing assistance to study the orientation and implementation of projects.

Financial resources:
-
Financial resources offered by banks, including Thessaly cooperative banks;
Community programmes;
Membership fees, grants and miscellaneous contributions.
January 2014
MECHANISMS TO FACILITATE THE DIRECT RESOURCE MOBILISATION

Training offered by public and private organisations, training workshops and public presentation of the "best
practices";

Public research centres for innovation and transfer of appropriate new technologies;

Services offered by banks (Agricultural Bank, Cooperative Banks of Thessaly, etc.);

Communication, awareness and dissemination of research results:
-
Project proposals;
Creation of a list of members and participants;
Organisation of meetings, creation of forums, results of research projects, etc.

Strategic initiatives made by the Ministry of Rural Development and Food under the CAP or the CRSN
(innovation, entrepreneurship and development) and implemented by its decentralised services;

Thessaly territorial community programmes (region and demes).
The above resources can be activated as part of:

Public policies and programmes, such as the CAP and the CRSN regional programme (training, business
support, etc.);

Funding offered banks such as the Agricultural Bank of Greece and the Piraeus Bank (solicitation of the
strategic development plan of contract farming for the establishment of a funding system for livestock
breeders and fodder producers by cooperatives and companies in the dairy chain).
Given the current crisis in the Greece, the cluster will rely on greatly reduced domestic financial resources.
However, the ETHIAGE, University of Thessaly and TUI research centres have proven success in mobilising EU
funding for innovation and R&D. The Ministry of Rural Development and Food seems to have realised the
potential value of creating the dairy chain and its impact on the national and regional GDP, employment and
agriculture restructuring. Thus, the dairy chain has been elevated to the rank of investment priorities by the
state.
2.3.6. Potential partners
FORMATION OF THE THESSALY DAIRY CLUSTER

The core
-
Thessaly SME dairies interested in participating in discussions on the formation of the cluster;
Thessaly Breeders Cooperative: THES-GAL (dairy cows), THESGI (fodder producers), Karditsa and
Elassona sheep farmers cooperatives, etc.

Support structures
-
Thessaly Competent public services;
Consular Chambers and Industrial Union of Thessaly;
Relevant departments of the University of Thessaly (Agronomy, Regional Development, School of
Veterinary Medicine, Biotechnology) and the TUI (Animal Production);
Local authorities of Thessaly (Demes and region);
National public authorities (Ministry of Rural Development and Food);
Thessaly higher education establishments active in the transmission of research results and knowledge;
Local development agencies established in Thessaly.
-
60
January 2014
CREATION OF PARTNERSHIPS AND STRATEGIC ALLIANCES
One of the priorities proposed by the actors is the creation of partnerships and strategic alliances:

With the Thessalian agri-food dairy chain;

With the dairy chain and related industries of the neighbouring regions integrated in the Thessaly dairy pool;

In Greece, the Mediterranean and the world.
2.3.7. Terms of governance and leadership
DEFINITION OF THE GOVERNANCE MODE
The choice of governance must take into account three objectives for the development of the cluster:

Improvement of the effectiveness of relationships and exchanges between partners;

Development of a range of services to meet the objectives of partners and companies' expectations;

Ensure the sustainability of the cluster.
These three combined objectives require governance to coordinate the provision of services and implement
collective territorial development projects, even after the LACTIMED project.
The creation of a Thessaly dairy cluster requires organised mobilisation of the actors involved so that they are
able to come together and produce the information needed to develop collaborations and projects. Therefore,
the structure for these tasks and the services it will offer must be clearly defined. It may be established on the
basis of a short-and medium-term project for the priority issues of the dairy chain while preparing for the future
extension of the cluster. That is why, under the LACTIMED project, regular meetings will be held with all
industry representatives to discuss governance and the possibilities of information, use and exploitation of new
technologies and markets.
Governance should therefore be realised at the end of a process that begins with the mobilisation of the
Thessaly dairy chain actors and ends with a gathering of actors representing various links and that have
consciously chosen to participate in the cluster formation.
Thus, the first action will be to form a territorial steering committee including all actors in the dairy chain and in
the territory involved. The steering committee will be mainly to coordinate joint efforts and ensure their continuity
in the medium/ long term, with the following objectives:

Support cooperation, collaboration and networking actions by supporting projects;

Support the cluster organisation (consultation on the legal form, the leadership structure, etc.).
In addition, specific governance arrangements are planned and tailored for each phase:

Phase 1: establishment of a steering committee for each separate action of the LACTIMED project;

Phase 2: formation of a structure by those directly involved in the dairy cluster.
In Phase 1, management of the cluster will be carried out by representatives of the participating organisations
and will aim to promote a broader action plan. For each action, a separate working group will be created and will
have the responsibility for implementing the action in question.
Management of Phase 2 of the cluster will be by professionals of the companies constituting the cluster "core",
as well as by the structure that will be encouraged and facilitated its development. This management system will
result from consultation process and cannot be imposed.
The choice and the role of the facilitator is a key factor for the success of the cluster, especially in Phase 1.
Indeed, the facilitator is responsible for the implementation of actions and ensures that they meet the common
interests of members. In the event that this role could be assigned to any future members of the cluster, it could
be done in a professional network. This will be discussed in the meetings and consultations within the
LACTIMED project.
Concerning the shape of the cluster the most adapted to Thessaly, experience has shown that voluntary
partnerships are more effective than rigid forms with too many contractual commitments. Respondents within
the field survey did not give a clear answer on this. They indicated, however, that the development and signing
of a "Thessaly territory dairy charter" could be a first positive and constructive step. This charter will include the
commitments and objectives of the signatories.
61
January 2014
EVALUATION OF SCENARIOS FOR STEERING THE CLUSTER
Defining the terms best suited to governance of the Thessaly dairy chain means developing a "hybrid form of
market and non-market relations to adapt, coordinate and monitor exchanges between heterogeneous entities.
These objectives can be achieved by both economic and social, and transactional and relational complex,
regulatory mechanisms" (Poivret, 2010).

Hierarchical governance
The first scenario would be to entrust the cluster steering to one or more leading companies in the Thessaly
dairy chain. However, the diagnosis revealed the danger of adopting a governance system led by a large,
regional dairy company, which would lead to regulatory mechanisms close to the Williamson hierarchy. Indeed,
the Thessaly dairy chain faces company individualism, strategy heterogeneity, market diversity and low
horizontal exchanges. This results from the lack of economic links between companies, relations between
customers and suppliers and the fact that few companies sell to the same customers. The dairy chain has,
however, a strong local presence, based on traditional, interpersonal relations between farmers and processors,
on the control of raw materials especially for small processors and the high fidelity of local and regional
consumers. These factors favour the choice of a flexible and innovative network based on mutual adjustment
mechanisms (Mintzberg, 1982). Entrusting the control of the cluster to one or leading companies might
strengthen the latent opposition between small and large processors. In addition, the Thessaly dairy chain is
characterised by the absence of outsourcing activities, which does not facilitate cooperation around a leading
company.

Associative governance
The second scenario is associative governance (Ehlinger et al., 2007), where coordination between the actors is
by mutual adjustment. Despite apparent cultural and institutional proximity at the regional level, the diagnostic
results showed the commitment of the majority of processors their territory, in which they activate their
interpersonal relations with farmers to control their milk supply. This results in a lack of confidence, reinforced by
the absence of horizontal cooperation. In the case of self-organising networks (Assens, 2001), members usually
rely on organisations whose technical support is short-term (Barrabel et al., 2007). This often leads to lack of
skill, difficulties in raising awareness of the network and making them think about development opportunities
and environmental changes. The associative governance scenario, which seems feasible, could rely on small
entrepreneurs who are also most favourable to cooperation. However, such cooperation might fail due to lack of
a specialised organisation and support structures, as well as enhanced competition between small and large
companies.

Territorial governance
The third scenario, and one that seems best suited to the situation and the current and future needs of the
Thessaly dairy chain, is that of territorial governance. It differs from the associative governance that any action
is discussed and decided together. According to Ehlinger (2007), a range of actors of the territory (institutional,
politicians, industrialists, scientists and training centres) set up via an association, a voluntary territorial
development action (Poivret, 2010). This choice is supported by the strong local roots of processors and their
products, territorial integration of livestock, including Thessaly sheep and goat, new skills of the Region and the
Demes in the form of local authorities, the presence of numerous research centres and the lack of organisation
bringing together the industry manufacturers.
The choice of territorial governance should not lead to losing sight of the main driving force of the cluster, which
is the group of dairy companies. They are the ones who will eventually decide the formation of a contractual or
institutional structure oriented towards international markets and the innovation cluster, taking advantage of the
structures and the cooperation established in Phase 1.
Once the model is chosen, the functions of the governance system are:

Monitor the implementation of strategic objectives and manage the future direction of the cluster;

Manage the resources, funding and personnel required;

Enhance the organisational capacity and expertise gained in Phase 1;

Promote contacts, collaboration and partnerships.
After selecting the organisation form, the partners will have to agree on the system of governance, on the
funding, the operation and the promotion of the cluster. Funding can be supported by its members and/ or
dedicated policies.
62
January 2014
FORMATION OF THE LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE
Such a structure must form its own team whose main function is to mobilise members around actions and
collective projects included in the process of training and development of the cluster group projects and
communication of the cluster’s activities.
In the preferred progressive approach, it is necessary, once "full participation" has been obtained, to proceed to
the creation of a leadership structure and team organisation. This should aim to harmonise the collaboration
between public and private actors in Thessaly. It should nevertheless be noted that, given the crisis and the
liquidity problem that affects Greece, funding a leadership structure with trained staff and appropriate tools may
be difficult.
Most of the actors prefer this team to be informal, consisting of company professionals in the cluster, and that
the University and the expertise and innovation clusters play a greater role. They hope that such a team is
formed in parallel with the progress of the LACTIMED project, the cluster development process and the
implementation of planned actions. Actors accept all the intermediate roles of such a large group, at least
initially. Finally, they consider that internal regulations should define the management and operation of the
leadership team, as well as the services proposed to companies in the dairy chain.
The main functions of the leadership structure can be:

Leadership and management of the cluster;

Definition of competence of the leadership team

and training of operational staff;

Management of the relationship with members and contacts;

Definition of a strategy and implementation through collaborations between actors;

Proposal of actions implemented for companies;

Knowledge of the needs of members;

Administrative support.
Finally, dairy chain actors consider as crucial factors to the cohesion of the cluster and effective cooperation, the
synergy between the central enterprises and support structures, and the creation of action groups (task force) to
meet the needs of the cluster. A member of the leadership team must participate in each of these action groups.
In conclusion, it is important to mention that the vast majority of respondents agree that such a structure should
be animated in the medium term with more or less restricted human and financial resources. They also believe
that only a leadership structure based on expertise and strong regional innovation structures could become
autonomous faced with the major actors in the dairy chain and ensure effective and balanced governance.
63
January 2014
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Greek sources
-
Anifantakis Em. (1993), Manufacturing cheese, Stamouli Editions, Athens (in Greek)
Hellenic National Committee of Milk (2005), Guide to good practice in the dairy chain, Athens (in Greek)
Greek Consulate General in Dusseldorf, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs (2012), The yoghurt
market in Germany - "Greek style" Yoghurt - Trade Evolutions (in Greek)
http://dsCAPe.aua.gr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10329/4956/Georgakopoulos_D.pdf?sequence=1 (in Greek)
Economou E. (2011), The dominant trends in the packed and private brand Feta PDO cheese market, 3rd
Festival of Greek Milk and Cheese, p. 42 (in Greek)
EFET (2012), Guidance on the application system based on the principles of HACCP in small dairies,
Athens (in Greek)
Gaki D. (2013), Territorial Approach of organisation, management and development of local production
systems in mountainous areas, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Planning, Urban Planning and Regional
Development, University of Thessaly, p. 427 (in Greek)
Georgakopoulos D. (2012), The dairy market in Greece and the links with the international market: a
macroeconomic and microeconomic approach, Master Thesis in Rural Economy and Development,
Agricultural University of Athens (in Greek)
ICAP (2009), Sectoral study on dairy products (in Greek)
ICAP (2011), 2011 annual report on the situation and prospects of SMEs in Greece: Sectoral analysis of
cheese – dairy products, 2nd edition (in Greek)
Kondyli, E., Katsiari, M.C., Voutsinas, L.P. (2008) Chemical and sensory characteristics of Galotyri-type
cheese made using different procedures, In Food Control, 19:3:301-307
Koukouzelis G. (1965), Artificial prairies - pastures: - installation - management, Athens (in Greek)
Kroustalaki-Beveratou, S. (1990), Studies in the rural economy, agricultural cooperatives: institution of
social and economic development, Athens, Agricultural Bank of Greece Ed. (in Greek)
Rural Space Laboratory, University of Thessaly and the Development Agency of Karditsa SA (ΑΝΚΑ)
(2011), NOVAGRIMED: Agricultural Innovations in Mediterranean regions, MED Programme
Rural Space Laboratory, University of Thessaly (1999), Survey of the distinguishing characteristics of
processed agricultural farm products: consumer and market attitudes, FAIR programme (1996-1999)
Litopoulou-Tzanetaki E., Tzanetakis N. (2011), Microbiological characteristics of Greek traditional cheeses,
In Small Ruminant Research, 101:1-32:17-32
Milona E. (2006), Marketing of pasteurised milk in Greece, Master’s Degree, University of Harokopio,
Department of Domestic Economics and Ecology, Athens, p. 287 (in Greek)
Pappa E. (2009), Business Innovation and Regional Development (in Greek)
Pheka V. (2009), Strategic groups of the Greek dairy industry, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Economics and
Social, University of Macedonia, p. 296 (in Greek)
Samouris G. (2008), Hygiene instruction on a small dairy, National Institute of Rural Research - Veterinary
Research Institute of Thessaloniki (in Greek)
ΣΒΒΕ (2003), Study on sheep and goat farming, and organic production of biological products based on
sheep and goat’s milk - Abstract, Excellence in Central Macedonia - Dairy products network, p. 23 (in Greek)
Skordili S. (2008), Aspects of food globalization: geographical processing of the food products supply
networks, Journal of Social Research, 125 (2008), pp. 131-161 (in Greek)
Skoupra M. (2009), Management of dairy products after production focusing on returns, Master’s degree,
University of Harokopio, Department of Domestic Economics and Ecology, Athens, p. 132 (in Greek)
Simeonidou Alexia B. (2010), Analysis of competition in the dairy sector and financial analysis of the Drama
dairy industry "NEOGAL SA", Agriculture University of Athens (in Greek)
Taki Chr. (2010), Willingness to pay for standard and packed Feta, Master’s degree, Department of
Economics and Rural Development, Agriculture University of Athens, Athens (in Greek)
-
-
-
64
-
-
-
-
-
-
January 2014
Thanopoulos R. (2010), Legume – cereal intercropping: appropriate combination of ecological agriculture,
DIO control body and certification of organic products (in Greek)
Theodorides A. (2008), Results of policy implementation in the area of dairy cows, PhD Thesis, Aristotle
University of Thessaloniki
Tsiboukas, K. (2003), Restructuring of cotton production by semi- intensive sheep farming: a technoeconomic assessment, Bulletin of Zootechnical Science, no. 28, pp. 39-60 (in Greek)
Tsiboukas, K. (2006) Future of ruminant livestock in the framework of the new CAP, Bulletin of the
Zootechnical Science, No. 31, pp. 33-52 (in Greek)
Vamvakeri K. E. (2010), Identification of factors affecting the loyalty of branded food consumers: the case of
dairy products brands, Agriculture University of Athens (in Greek)
Zerfiridis Gr. (2001), Technology of dairy products : cheese making, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,
Department of Agronomy, Food Sciences and Technologies, Giahouli Thessaloniki Editions
Region of Thessaly (2011), Operational Programme of Thessaly: Phase A - Strategic Planning, Department
of Planning and Development (in Greek)
Region of Thessaly (2011), Project: Thessaly regional products (in Greek)
Region of Western Greece (2011), Project: Western Greece regional products, p. 28 (in Greek)
Communication from the European Commission, Guidelines on best EU practices for voluntary certification
of agricultural products and foodstuffs (2010/ C 341/ 04), 16.12.2010, Official Journal of the European Union
(in Greek)
Regulation (EU) No. 261/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on March 14, 2012, amending
Regulation (EU) No. 1234/2007 of the Council as regards contractual relations in the milk and dairy
products. L 94/38 Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2012
Greek Official Journal (FEK) 8/11-1-1994, Recognition of PDO cheeses: Feta, Manouri Kefalotyri, Kaseri
mizithra, Anthotyros, Galotyri, Kefalograviera (in Greek)
Greek Official Journal (FEK) 16/14-1-1994, Recognition of PDO cheeses: Graviera Agrafon (in Greek)
Greek Official Journal (FEK) 24/18-1-1994, Recognition of PDO cheeses: Anebato (in Greek)
Greek Official Journal (FEK) 25/18-1-1994, Recognition of PDO cheeses: Mpatzos, Telemes (in Greek)
Regulation (EE) No. 1151/ 2012 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT and COUNCIL of November 21, 2012
for quality systems for agricultural products and foodstuffs, Official Journal of the European Union
Ministry of Rural Development and Food, Directorate of Organic Farming, Department of products PDO,
PGI and TSG (2006), PDO Greek Cheeses, Directorate of Extension, Department of awareness of the rural
population (in Greek)
Ministry of Rural Development and Food (2007), Development of the sheep and goat sector based on the
proposals and recommendations of the regional studies of the new CAP, Office of the Secretary General (in
Greek)
Ministry of Rural Development and Food (2011), Greek animal breeding: animal production, General
Directorate of Animal Production (in Greek)
Ministry of Rural Development and Food (2011) Genetic improvement of farm animals in Greece, General
Directorate of Animal Production (in Greek)
-
AB Vassilopoulos distributor brochure, Greek tradition: small producers, 20 unique cheeses (in Greek)
AB Vassilopoulos distributor brochure, Nutria Life, vol. 9 - cheese, p. 37 (in Greek)
AB Vassilopoulos distributor brochure, At AB, we trust the Greek producers and the quality of Greek
products, vol. 2, p. 16 (in Greek)

Foreign sources
-
AGROTERRA, No. 07, 13 April 2013, p.14
Anthopoulou Th. (2013), Geographical indications and dynamics of territorial development in Greece: The
difficult emergence of collective action, in Anthopoulou Th., Food origin and specificities. A territorial
approach to rural development, Athens: Papazisi, pp. 255-279 (in Greek)
65
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
January 2014
Anthopoulou Th., Kaberis N., (2013) Geographical indications and dynamics of territorial development. The
difficult transition from tacit coordination to a collective asset valuation approach (Greece), Options
Méditerranéennes, Série A, No. 104, pp. 61-76
Anthopoulou Th., Vallerand Fr. (2003), Cheese industry knowledge team 13 Greece, SPL cheese in the
island of Lesvos, Mytilene, Athens, January 2003, Euromed Programme, 1st year final Report
Assens C. (2001), Stability and plasticity in self-organised networks, European Journal of Economic and
Social Systems, 14, 4, pp. 311-332
Barjolle D., Damary P., Schaer B. (2010), Certification schemes and sustainable rural development:
analytical framework for assessment impacts, paper in the International Seminar EAAE-SYAL Spatial
Dynamics in Agrifood Systems: Implications for Sustainability and Consumer Welfare, Parma: University of
Parma, 27-30 October 2010
Barrabel M., Huault T., Meier O. (2007), Changing nature and sustainability of the model of industrial district:
The case of Technic Valley in France, Growth and change, 38, 4, pp. 568-594
Bérard L., Marchenay P. (2006), Localised production and geographical indications: consideration of local
knowledge and biodiversity, Revue Internationale des Sciences Sociales, 187(1): 115-122
Belletti G., Marescotti A. (University of Florence, Italy), Paus M., Reviron S. (AGRIDEA), Deppeler A.,
Stamm H., Thévenod-Mottet E. (IPI), The Effects of Protecting Geographical Indications Ways and Means of
their Evaluation, Editor Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property, Stauffacherstrasse 65/59g, CH-3003
Bern Publication/ Publication No 7 (07.11); second, revised edition, 09.11, http://www.ige.ch
Bougeois, L. (1984), Strategic management and determinism, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9/4,
pp. 25-39
Bleeke, J. (1991), Four strategies to face the open Europe, Harvard Expansion, summer, pp. 99-108
Bouinot J. (2007), Competitiveness clusters: the use of cluster model, Cybergeo: European Journal of
Geography [Online], Debates, Chronicle of economic geography, posted March 9, 2007, consulted May 3,
2013.URL: http://cybergeo.revues.org/4961; DOI: 10.4000/cybergeo.4961
CAAAQ (2008) Agriculture and agri-food: securing and building the future. Commission report on the future
of Quebec agriculture and agri-food
http://www.caaaq.gouv.qc.ca/documentation/rapportfinal.fr.html
Calvez, E. (1997), Recent and intense changes in the Breton dairy economy, Cahiers Economiques de
Bretagne, no. 2, pp. 17-29
Capoulas Santos Luis Manuel (2012), Compromised amendments on regulation on support for rural
development, Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
European Economic and Social Committee NAT/450 (2010), Future strategy for the EU dairy industry for the
period 2010-2015 and beyond (initiative opinion), Reporter: Frank ALLEN, Brussels
Conner K.R., Prahalad C.K. (1996), A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism,
Organization Science, 5, Sept- Oct, pp. 477-501
Leducq D., Lusso B. (2011), Innovative cluster: conceptualisation and territorial application, Cybergeo:
European Journal of Geography [Online], Space, Society, Territory, Article 521, posted March 7, 2011,
consulted March 11, 2013. URL: http://cybergeo.revues.org/23513; DOI: 10.4000/cybergeo.23513
Doyon M. (2006), Competitive environment dairy processing: what could be done tomorrow? Presented to
the Council of the Quebec dairy industry, 14/10/2006
Doyon M. (2007), Competitive environment of food processing: the case of milk, Presented at the 2007
AQINAC dairy meeting, December
Dosi, G., Teece, D. and Winter, S. (1990), Company boundaries: towards a coherence theory of big
business, Revue d’Economie Industrielle, no. 51, 1er trim
Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales in Montreal (1995), The dairy industry of the future: strategies for
sustainable development of the processing industry. The analysis of the major trends and breaks new
paradigms, Agribusiness Management Centre
ÉcoRessources Consultants (2007a), The New Brunswick Dairy Industry: Economic and Strategic Cluster
Study, Progress Report 1: Description of the industry and outlook on international issues, report submitted
to the New Brunswick Dairy Industry Council, June
www.ecoressources.com/en/Projets/agro_projets_NBDairy.htm
ÉcoRessources Consultants (2007b), The New Brunswick Dairy Industry: Economic and Strategic Cluster
Study, Progress Report 2: The Economic Impact of the New Brunswick Dairy Industry, report submitted to
the New Brunswick Dairy Industry Council, August
66
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
January 2014
ÉcoRessources Consultants (2007c), The New Brunswick Dairy Industry: Economic and Strategic Cluster
Study, Progress Report 3: Analysis of the development of the New Brunswick Dairy chain, report submitted
to the New Brunswick Dairy Industry Council, October
ÉcoRessources Consultants (2007d), The New Brunswick Dairy Industry: Economic and Strategic Cluster
Study, Progress Report 4 in Preparation for the January 14th-15th Strategic Engagement Planning Session:
SWOT Analysis and Recommendations, report submitted to the New Brunswick Dairy Industry Council,
October www.ecoressources.com/en/Projets/agro_projets_NBDairy.htm
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2011), Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the
Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
(EAFRD), Cancels and replaces document COM (2011) 627 final of October 12, 2011 Applies to FR/ EN/
DE versions (table of contents)
Fousekis P., Spathis P., Tsiboukas K., Assessing the efficiency of sheep farming in mountainous areas of
Greece. A non-parametric approach, Agricultural Economics Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, August 2001, p. 5-15 (in
Greek)
Goussios D. (1997), Success of a community of breeders of the Pindos massif. In "Mediterranean lessfavoured areas". (Editors: Roux B and D. Guerraoui) Harmattant Ed. - Toubkal Ed., Paris, 1997
Guegen G. (1997), Turmoil - does the company need to be reactive? AIMS Communication Symposium
Grenier C. (1997), Stress or obstacle or means to strategic action organisations? AIMS Communication
Symposium
Hadjigeorgiou I., Vallerand F., Tsiboukas K., Zervas, G. (1999), The socio-economics of sheep and goat
farming, in Greece, and the implications for future rural development, In “Livestock Production in the
European Less Favoured Areas”, FAIR Concerted Action LSIRD Network – Laker & Milne Ed. – Macaulay
Ed. Land Use Res. Inst., Scotland, pp.17-23
Hofer C.W., Schendel, D., (1978), Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts, West Publishing, St Paul, MN
Lancaster G., Massingham L. (1993), Marketing Warfare in the 1980’s, The Journal of Business Strategy,
winter, p. 34, UK.
Lazani A. (2009), The DODONI SA cooperative dairy and contribution to the development of the region,
Master’s Thesis, University of Harokopio, Athens
Linck T. (2009), Heritage and classification of "traditional" cheese: a comparative approach of qualification
procedures, Ruralia [Online], 16/ 17 | 2005 posted July 1, 2009, consulted March 11, 2013. URL:
http://ruralia.revues.org/1086
Louis-Samuel Jacques, Morton G, Belzile B, Forest J-F. (2008), The dairy sector in New Brunswick: a
strategic and economic study of the industrial cluster, final report: a new generation of innovation and
expertise in the dairy sector
Muchnik J., Canada J., Salcido G.T. (2008), Localised food systems: state of research and perspectives,
Cahiers Agricultures, 17(6): 513-519
Mintzberg H. (1982), Structure and dynamics of organisations, Paris: Organisation editions, 434 p.
Nelson R.R., Winter, S.G. (1982), An evolutionary theory of economic change, Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, Cambridge
Pecqueur B. (2006), What is the "territorial turn" of the globalised world economy, Institute of Alpine
Geography, Joseph Fourier, Grenoble University, France
Poivret C. (2010), Governance of a network of organisations territorialised by an animation structure: the
case of a cluster. 20th AIMS Conference (International Association of Strategic Management), Luxembourg
Knowledge Project (Euromed Heritage II), Typical product sheet, Cheese sector, Cheese name: Mytilene
Ladotiri, Partner 13 - University of Athens Paniuton, Scientific Coordinator: Anthopoulou T., Scientific
Consultant: Vallerand F.
Papadopoulos Spiros, General Secretary Of Industry Ministry Of Development, Entrepreneurial &
Investment Opportunities in the Region Of Thessaly
Peano Cristiana, Francesco Sottile, Slow Food Presidia in Europe: A Model of Sustainability-An assessment
of the sociocultural, agri-environmental and economic results 2000-2012, Slow Food Foundation for
Biodiversity
Pfeffer J., Salancik G.R. (1987), The external control of organizations, Harper & Row, New York
67
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
January 2014
Porter M.E. (1998), Clusters and the New Economics of Competition, Reprint number 98609, Harvard
Business Review, November-December, pp. 77-90
Porter M. (2000), The 5 P Model-Porter Analysis, Harvard Journal of Management, Harvard, USA
Rastoin J.L., Bourgeois L., Cheriet F., Movahedi N. (2009), For agricultural policy and Euro-Mediterranean
food. Build the Mediterranean, IPEMED
Requier-Desjardins D. (2007), Territorial dynamics. Debates and issues between different disciplinary
approaches. The evolution of the debate on the SYAL: Through the eyes of an economist, XLIII Symposium
ASRDLF Grenoble-Chambery, July 11, 12, 13, 2007
Robic P. (1998), Institutional rupture and skills development: a path of expansion for SME development, 4th
International Conference on SME Frontiers October 22, 23, 24, 1998
Rumelt R.P. (1974), Strategy, structure and economic performance, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Siomkos G. (2004), Strategic Marketing, Stamoulis Ed., Athens (in Greek)
Smith K.G, Grimm C.M. (1987), Environmental variation, strategic change and firm performance: study of
railroad deregulation, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 8, pp. 363 -376
SYAL (2010), A new tool for the development of marginal areas. The lessons of the alliance of rural agriindustries of the Lacandon Jungle, Chiapas. In Innovation and Sustainable Development in Agriculture and
Agri-Food, ISDA 2010, Montpellier, June 28-30, 2010
Teece D.J., Pisano G., Shuen, A. (1997), Dynamic capabilities and strategic management, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol.18, no. 7, pp. 509-533
Vakoufaris H. (2010), The impact of Mytilinis Ladotyri PDO cheese on the rural development of Lesvos
island, Greece, Local Environment, 15(1): 27-41
Vallerand F., Tsiboukas K., Kazakopoulos L. (2000), Models and advisory facilities: are they adapted to
farming in less sought areas? Illustration from the needs analysis and the search for alternatives in the
Greek dairy sector, In "Livestock farming systems; Integrating animal science advances into the search for
sustainability", EAAP Publ. 97, 2000, pp. 327-331
Vallerand F., Tsiboukas K., Kazakopoulos L. (2001), A Greek paradox: ubiquitous sheep and goat breeding
but largely neglected by development structures, and how to fix it, In "Production systems and quality in
sheep and goats," Mediterranean options, Series A, No. 46, 2001, pp. 189-194
Vallerand F., Tsiboukas K. (2004), Forms of the small ruminant milk and cheese sectors in Greece and their
development prospects, In "The evolution of goat and sheep production systems: Future of extensive
systems in response in a changing society", Mediterranean Options, Series A, No. 61, 2004, p. 307-315
Vallerand F., Tsiboukas K (2005), Local cheeses: are they still a pillar in developing the Greek small
ruminant dairy chain? Forthcoming (revised) in "Role of small and medium-sized dairies in local
development", CIRAD - INRA programme in the drafting stage of the abstract (forthcoming 2005)
Vallerand F., Dubeuf J.-P., Tsiboukas K. (2007), Sheep and goat’s milk in the Mediterranean and the
Balkans: diversity of local situations and sectoral prospects , Cahiers Agricultures, vol. 16, no. 4, JulyAugust 2007, p. 258-264
Vandecandelaere E., Arfini F., Beletti G., Marescotti A. (ed.) (2009), Linking People, Places and Products: A
Guide for Promoting Quality Linked to Geographical Origin and Sustainable Geographical Indications,
Rome: FAO-SINER-GI (www.foodquality-origin.org)
WEBSITES
-
http://www.thessalikigi.gr/enot-news/1916
http://www.farmahellas.gr/%CE%BC%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%81%CE%AC%CF%84%CF%85%CF%81%CE%BF%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%AF%CE%B1
http://www.egaio.gr/files/ekdilwseis-imerides/imerida_Naxos_11_08/Odhgos_Tyrokomeiou.pdf
http://www.belgomilk.gr/el/mikro-turokomeio-gr
http://kthnotrofia.pblogs.gr/2012/06/oikogeneiaka-tyrokomeia-apo-kthnotrofoys.html
http://www.agrospecom.gr/sited1b7.html?&file=pages.xml&catid=64&lang=el
http://www.agronews.gr/business/ependutika-projects/arthro/84112/ta-vimata-gia-ti-dimiourgia-mias-mikrismonadas-turokomisis-/
http://www.emprosnet.gr/palies-katigories-emprosnet/agrotika?page=54
http://www.ethnos.gr/entheta.asp?catid=23353&subid=2&pubid=63674970
http://www.savoirs.polimi.it
68
-
http://www.thessalia.gov.gr/
http://library.aua.gr/js_php/msc-phd.php
http://www.tovima.gr/finance/article/?aid=179611
http://www.papadakisfarm.gr/
69
January 2014
January 2014
Appendices
Appendix 1: Specifications of Thessaly’s typical dairy products
General characteristics of Thessaly dairy products
Greece offers a wide range of dairy products, especially cheese. Of the 84 PDO-registered Greek products, 21
are cheeses.
"In cheese making, the animal breeds, the mode of management and breeding, the soil type in the region, as
well as methods of preparation and ripening cheeses are factors that distinguish a cheese and constitute part of
the regional tradition. The protection of designations of origin and geographical indications can be a lever for
development for remote and disadvantaged areas by increasing the competitiveness of products, and therefore
the producers’ income. At the same time, protected designations guarantee to consumers the origin of the
products they buy" (Ministry of Rural Development and food, 2006).
The dairy products traditionally produced in Thessaly are:

Made from fresh goat and cow's milk and produced on farms or organic farms;

Various PDO or traditionally produced hard, semi-hard or soft cheeses;

Yoghurt based on sheep, goat or cow's milk, using traditional or European methods (with reduced fat, fruits,
cereals, honey and other);

Butter, cream, rice pudding, etc.
This Appendix presents the 13 most important dairy products produced throughout Greece, especially in
Thessaly. Indeed, only one PDO cheese is made exclusively in Thessaly: Graviera Agrafon. All other PDO
cheeses produced in Thessaly generally have a national character. Amongst numerous units of older and
contemporary farms, some dairies produce some local sub-products, such as Tsalafouti.
Greek cheeses can be divided into five categories:

Cheeses in brine, such as classic Feta, Telemes, Touloumisio, Sféla and Mpatsos;

Soft cheeses, such as Galotyri and Kopanisti;

Semi-hard cheeses, such as Kaséri and Krasotiri;

Hard cheeses, such as Kefalotiri, Graviera, Kefalograviera, Ladotiri, Formaella, Korfou, Metsobone and San
Michalis;

Low-fat whey cheeses, such as Anthotyro, Mizithra and Xinomizithra; Manouri contains the most fat.
All PDO products must comply with the following rules:

Milking must be done at least 10 days after calving;

Milk must be of good quality, and be fresh or pasteurised;

Coagulation must be made within 48 hours of milking and until coagulation, milk must be stored under
controlled temperature conditions;

Making cheese from milk of another species is prohibited.
70
January 2014
Specification 1 – GRAVIERA AGRAFON (ΓΡΑΒΙΕΡΑ ΑΓΡΑΦΩΝ) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk (no more than 30%) into
Graviera Agrafon, its conservation conditions and its development on the market.
PRODUCT

Presentation: 2-3 kg and 8-10 kg rounds;
 Description: hard, pale yellow cheese dotted with
small holes;
 Name: Graviera Agrafon (No. 313031/ Official
Journal 16/14-01-1994);
 Type of milk: sheep and/ or goat (no more than
30%);

Composition: 40% fat.
This is one of the best Greek "gruyere" cheeses.
Made exclusively in the cold climate of the
mountainous region of Agrafa, it holds all the aromas
and flavours of mountain herbs. Animal breeds that
provide the milk are adapted to the region and their
diet is based on the local flora.
It can be eaten alone, with bread and fruit, or as a meal accompaniment.
PROCESSING METHOD

Pasteurisation: milk is heated to 34-36°C, it coagulates and the curd is divided after 25-35 minutes;

Moulding: the curd is then heated to 48-52°C with constant stirring, and then placed into moulds and
subjected to pressure;

Drying: after 24 hours, the cheese is removed from the mould and placed on wooden shelves for two days;

Brining: the cheese is then placed in a brine bath for four days;

Drying and salting: the cheese is dried in a dry room at a temperature between 12 and 15°C, with a humidity
rate of 85%; at this stage, the cheese is dry salted on the surface for three weeks to obtain a salt content
equivalent to 2% of its weight;

Refining (three months): the cheese is transported to a room with a temperature between 16 and 18°C
where it remains for a month, and then to a cooler room with a moisture content of 90-95%; microflora
gradually forms on the surface, giving it the cheese characteristic.
Specification 2 – FETA (ΦΕΤΑ) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk (no more than 30%) into Feta,
its conservation conditions and its development on the market.
PRODUCT
 Presentation: in 20 to 50 kg wooden barrels or tin cans
(Ténékédès) in the form of 1 to 2 kg pieces;

Description: soft cheese practically perforation-free;

Name: Feta (No. 313025/ Official Journal 8/11-01-1994);

Type of milk: sheep and/ or goat (no more than 30%);
 Composition: 52% moisture, 25-26% fat, 17% protein, 1.8 to
2.75% salt.
71
January 2014
The leading Greek cheese, Feta is made from sheep and/ or goat’s milk in brine produced exclusively in regions
of Macedonia, Thrace, Epirus, Thessaly, Central Greece, Peloponnese and the island of Lesbos. Animal breeds
that provide the milk are adapted to the region and their diet is based on the local flora.
Feta is consumed after refining for at least two months. It has a pleasant, slightly sour taste, and a rich
fragrance. It is consumed alone or with a meal or fruit. It is also used as an ingredient in the preparation of
pastries or traditional dishes. Organic Feta can be produced from using organic milk.
PROCESSING METHOD

Pasteurisation: milk is pasteurised and then it coagulates;

Moulding: the curd is placed in special containers (wooden or metal moulds) for natural drainage without
pressure;

Natural drainage: during draining, the surface is salted with coarse salt (edible sodium chloride);

Brining: after draining, brine is added (sodium chloride content: 7% of weight);

Refining (two months): firstly, the containers are placed for 15 days in refining chamber at a controlled
temperature of 18°C and at a humidity of at least 85%; secondly, the containers are placed for 45 days in
cold storage (refrigeration systems) at a constant temperature of 2-4°C and 85% humidity.
Specification 3 – TELEMES (ΤΕΛΕΜΕΣ) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep, goat and/ or cow’s milk into Télèmes, its
conservation conditions and its development on the market.
PRODUCT
 Presentation: in brine in 0.4, 0.8 and 1 kg plastic containers, or 15 kg
tin cans; can be cut into slices;
 Description: white to pale yellow, soft to semi-hard cheese, with or
without holes and some mechanical perforations;

Name: Télèmes (No. 313059/ Official Journal 25/18-01-1994)

Type of milk: sheep, goat and/ or cow;
 Composition: 56% maximum moisture, minimum 43% fat in the dry
matter.
This is a white cheese in brine made in numerous regions in Greece (Macedonia, Thrace, Epirus, Thessaly,
central Greece and the Peloponnese) from sheep, goat and/ or cow’s milk. Animal breeds that provide the milk
are adapted to the region and their diet is based on the local flora.
Telemes differs from Feta by its division into squares and storage in metal cans. It has a mild and pleasant,
slightly sour taste, and a rich aroma.
PROCESSING METHOD

Pasteurisation: milk is pasteurised; it coagulates at 33-35°C after 45-60 minutes;

Moulding: the curd is placed in special containers (wooden or metal moulds) for natural drainage;

Natural drainage: it is pressed with a weight of about twice that of the cheese volume;

Refining (three months): firstly, the cheese is cut and placed in brine 13-15 Be for 4-6 hours; secondly, it is
placed in layers in wooden barrels or metal containers, and is covered with brine 7-8 Be and stored at a
temperature of 12°C for one month; thirdly, it is kept in cold storage at a temperature below 6°C for two
months.
72
January 2014
Specification 4 – ANTHOTYROS (ΑΝΘΟΤΥΡΟ) PDO
This document defines the requirements for the processing of sheep and/ or goat’s whey into Anthotyros, its
PRODUCT
 Presentation: usually in the form of spherical balls or cones of
different sizes, fresh or dry cheese;
 Description: soft/ semi-hard, dry and white, no crust for fresh
Anthotyros, hard, dry, whitish for the refined variant;
 Name: Anthotyros (No. 313030/ Official Journal 8/11-011994);

Type of milk: sheep and/ or goat;
 Composition: 70% maximum moisture, minimum 65% fat in
the dry matter.
This cheese is made with fresh sheep and/ or goat’s milk from
breeds raised in Macedonia, Thrace, Thessaly, Central Greece, Peloponnese, Epirus, Crete, the Aegean
islands and the Ionian Sea. These breeds are adapted to the region of production and their diet is based on the
local flora.
The fresh variant of Anthotyros cheese is soft and creamy, and slightly salty. It is eaten for breakfast with honey
and fruit, in savoury dishes with oil, tomato and brine herbs. The refined variant is more salty. It is also well used
in cooked dishes.
PROCESSING METHOD

Filtering: the whey is filtered or centrifuged to remove granules;

Heating: the whey is heated with continuous stirring to 88-90°C for 40-45 min until a temperature of 68-70°C
has been reached when the cream or whole milk (sheep and/ or goat) is added in a ratio of 5 to 15%; when
80°C is reached, flakes appear and the heat is increased to 88-90°C while the stirring speed slows to a
stop; the temperature is maintained for 15-30 minutes;

For refined Anthotyros, temperatures are higher and the heating time is longer;

Natural drainage: the mixture is poured gently and gradually in tulle or conical strainers perforated for
drainage; it is placed in a cold room and can be consumed after 24 hours;

Drying and salting: for refined Anthotyros, the cheese is salted with fine salt after draining and stored in a
cool, well-ventilated place until it achieves less than 40% moisture;

Refining: for refined Anthotyros, the rounds are then cleaned and refined.
Specification 5 – GALOTYRI (ΓΑΛΟΤΥΡI) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Galotyri, its conservation
conditions and its development on the market.
PRODUCT

Presentation: 1, 5 and 10 kg plastic containers;
 Description: white, soft cheese and soft texture (spreadable) without a
crust;

Name: Galotyri (No. 313031/ Official Journal 8/11-01-1994);


Composition: 75% maximum humidity.
Galotyri is one of the oldest and most traditional Thessaly cheeses. It is made with fresh sheep and/ or goat’s
milk from animals bred in Thessaly and Epirus. Their diet is based on the local flora.
73
January 2014
It is characterised by a pleasant and fragrant, tart, refreshing taste. Due to its high moisture content (75%), the
lifespan of Galotyri stored at 4°C is limited to 30 days.
PROCESSING METHOD

Heating: raw milk is cooked, and then placed in a container, preferably in clay, where it is left for about 24 h
at room temperature;

Coagulation: it is then salted, kneaded and left to stand for two days, stirring occasionally, until the acidity
develops; rennet or a lactic ferment can also be added before salting to facilitate milk acidification and
coagulation;

Natural drainage: the curd is then wrapped in a cloth, or put in leather bags or in wooden casks for
drainage; the process is repeated with the following milked milk until the bags or barrels are filled;

Refining (two months): once filled, the containers are sealed and transferred to the cold room (-8°C) for
refining.
Specification 6 – MANOURI (ΜΑΝΟΥΡI) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Manouri, its conservation
PRODUCT

Presentation: different sizes, generally cylindrical;

Description: soft and skinless;

Name: Manouri (No. 313028/ Official Journal 8/11-01-1994);

Type of milk: sheep and/ or goat.
Manouri is made with whole, fresh sheep and/ or goat’s milk from breeds
raised in Macedonia (Western and Central) and Thessaly. Their diet is based
on the local flora.
It has a mild and pleasant taste with characteristic aromas. Butter and milk protein flavours are complementary.
Eaten fresh as a table cheese, it may be accompanied by honey and dried fruits. Slightly salty, it hardens during
ripening and becomes ideal for use in pasta. Considered one of the best Greek cheeses, it deserves an
international career due to its flavour that pleases the taste of European consumers.
PROCESSING METHOD

Filtration/ centrifugation: milk is centrifuged and enriched with sheep or goat’s milk cream;

Heating: the mixture is then heated to 88-90°C and stirred constantly for 40-45 minutes; when it reaches 7075°C, 1% salt is added, and as well as goat or sheep's milk to obtain a proportion of 25%;

Natural drainage: at 88-90°C, the cheese is put into cloth bags for drainage for four to five hours;

Conservation: it is then stored in a cold room at 4-5°C until it is eaten.
74
January 2014
Specification 7 – MIZITHRA (ΜΥΖΗΘΡA) PDO
This document defines the requirements for the processing of sheep, goat and/ or cow’s whey into Mizithra, its
PRODUCT

Presentation: 1 to 4 kg spherical cone;
 Description: soft and skinless, low fat for fresh Mizithra, hard cheese
and skinless for refined Mizithra;

Name: Mizithra (No. 313029/ Official Journal 8/11-01-1994);

Type of milk: sheep, goat and/ or cow;
 Composition: 40% moisture and 50% fat in the dry matter for fresh
Mizithra/ 70% moisture and 50% fat in the dry matter for dry Mizithra.
Mizithra is made throughout Greece from whey coming from the
manufacture of another cheese.
The fresh variant has a sweet taste and a neutral flavour. It is often used in baking and accompanies fresh and
dried fruits. The refined variant tastes salty. It hardens and can be used in pasta.
PROCESSING METHOD

Filtration/ centrifugation: the whey is centrifuged and transferred into pots, then enriched with goat or
sheep's milk cream;

Heating: heated, a little fresh sheep, goat and/ or cow’s milk is added at 65-70°C; the mixture is then heated
to 80°C and stirred constantly for 15-30 minutes; the stirring speed is then gradually reduced until
completely stopped;

For dry Mizithra, temperatures are higher and heating times are longer;

Drainage: the cheese is placed in cloth bags or perforated moulds for draining for four to five hours;

Conservation: it is then stored in a cold room at 4-5°C until consumption.

Drying and salting: for refined Mizithra, the cheese is salted with fine salt after draining and stored in a cool,
well-ventilated place until it reaches less than 40% moisture;

Refining: for dry Mizithra, the cheese is then cleaned, packaged and refined.
Specification 8 – XINOTYRI (ΞΙΝΟΤΥΡI)
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Xinotyri, its conservation
PRODUCT

Description: cream cheese, without any form or crust;

Name: Xinotyri;

Xinotyri has a pleasant taste and is slightly sour. Its texture resembles a
viscous, grainy or smooth yoghurt. Its lifespan is short due to its little or
no salt content, with the exception of products packaged under vacuum,
which have a shelf life of one year.
PROCESSING METHOD
This cheese is made from sheep or goat's milk by directly boiling the milk with or without the addition of salt. "On
the island of Naxos, this cheese is made from raw goat’s milk of breeds indigenous to the island. Rennet is
added to the milk and it is curded for about 24 h at room temperature. Sometimes a small amount of whey from
the previous day is used as a starter. The curd is transferred to a drainage fabric for three hours and then salted
at 1.5%. The curd is kneaded to disperse the salt uniformly, transferred into conical plastic moulds for three to
four days and turned daily. The moulds are removed and the cheeses are matured on wooden shelves for 30-45
75
January 2014
days." (Source: Litopoulou-Tzanetaki E., Tzanetakis N. (2011) "Microbiological characteristics of traditional
Greek cheeses" in Small Ruminant Research, 101:1-32:17-32).
Specification 9 – KEFALOTYRI (ΚΕΦΑΛΟΤΥΡI) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Kefalotyri, its
PRODUCT

Presentation: cylindrical rounds of different sizes;
 Description: hard cheese, constant volume and perforated, whitish to
pale yellow;

Name: Kefalotyri (No. 313026/ Official Journal 8/11-01-1994);


Composition: 38% maximum humidity and 40% fat in the dry matter
This cheese is made in numerous regions of Greece (Central Greece, Peloponnese, Thessaly, Crete, Epirus,
Macedonia, Ionian Islands and the department of Cyclades) from sheep and/ or goat’s milk of breeds adapted to
the region of production and whose diet is based on the local flora.
Relatively fatty, Kefalotyri has a slightly salty and spicy taste, and a rich aroma. It complements pasta dishes.
PROCESSING METHOD

Coagulation: the milk is heated to 34-36°C before being allowed to stand for 35 minutes, during which a
curd is formed;

Curd slicing: the curd is cut;

Heating: it is heated to about 45°C under continuous stirring;

Moulding: it is then placed in moulds under pressure for 24 hours and stored in a room at 14°C and 85%
humidity;

Brining: the forms are then placed in a brine bath of 18-20 Βe for about two days;

Refining (minimum of three months): the surface of the cheese is dry salted by simultaneous inversion, after
which it is kept at a temperature below 6°C, before being placed for at least three months in a refining room
at 12-14°C and 85-90% humidity.
Specification 10 – MPANTZIOS (ΜΠΑΤΖΟΣ) PDO
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Mpantzios, its
PRODUCT

Presentation: 0.4, 0.8 and 1 kg plastic containers or 15 kg tin cans;

Description: semi-hard or hard, white;

Name: Mpantzios (No. 313057/ Official Journal 25/18-01-1994)

 Composition: 42% moisture, 19-20% fat, 23% protein and 5-6%
salt.
Mpantzios is made in brine from sheep and/ or goat’s milk of breeds raised in West and Central Macedonia.
Their diet is based on the local flora.
It is low in fat and cut into square 1 kg pieces. The best way to enjoy it is fried. Cooking enhances its flavour and
aroma.
76
January 2014
PROCESSING METHOD

Coagulation: the milk is heated to 28-32°C, rennet is added to coagulate the milk in about 50 minutes;

Curd slicing: the curd is then divided into very small particles, and then allowed to stand for about 30
minutes;

Heating: the mass is then heated to 45°C with continuous stirring;

Natural draining: it is placed in a drainage fabric;

Slicing: the next day, the curd is cut into slices and the surface salted with coarse salt;

Refining (minimum three months): after about five days, the cheese is placed in metal containers with brine
(between 10 and 12% salt) and remains there until maturity, at least three months.
Specification 11 – TSALAFOUTI (ΤΣΑΛΑΦΟΥΤI)
This document defines the requirements for processing sheep and/ or goat’s milk into Tsalafouti, its
PRODUCT

Presentation: 1 kg plastic containers;

Description: smooth and creamy texture;

Name: Tsalafouti;


Tsalafouti is produced from fresh sheep and/ or goat’s milk from endemic breeds raised in Agrafa Karditsa
(Thessaly region). Their diet is based on the local flora. It is made in the last months of summer, when the milk
is very rich in fat.
This traditional Greek cheese has a little acidity and a pleasantly salty taste. It is eaten as a starter or a side
dish.
PROCESSING METHOD

Pasteurisation: the milk is boiled and a little salt is added;

Moulding: the milk is allowed to cool and then gradually poured into wooden containers;

Coagulation: the following days, the milk is mixed two or three times a day until the milk coagulates and has
the consistency of yoghurt;

Cooling: when it is ready, it is placed in cold storage.
Specification 12 – NIVATO (NIβATO)
This document defines the requirements for processing goat’s milk into Nivato, its conservation conditions and
its development on the market.
PRODUCT

Presentation: cheese spread;

Description: white cheese with a slightly grainy texture;

Name: Nivato;

Type of milk: goat;

Nivato is a very old traditional cheese of the Elassona mountains and is made with 100% goat’s milk. The
manufacturing process provides a light cheese, with a slightly sour taste, typically Greek. It has a balanced
salinity and deep flavour.
77
January 2014
It is eaten with crispbread or wholemeal bread. Spread on toasted buns ("Ntakos"), it accompanies well the
traditional "Tsipouro" (type of brandy/eau de vie alcohol served as an appetizer). It is also used in salads
instead of Feta. It can also be cooked with "Trahana", a slightly sticky soup made from dried sour milk. Beaten
with a little milk and pepper, or with hot peppers, it makes an excellent pasta sauce.
Specification 13 – YOGHURT (ΓΙΑΟΥΡΤI)
This document defines the requirements for the processing sheep, goat and/ or cow’s milk into yoghurt, its
PRODUCT

Presentation: plastic or ceramic pots;

Description: smooth and creamy texture;

Name: Yoghurt;

Type of milk: sheep, goat and/ or cow.
PROCESSING METHOD

Pasteurisation: the milk is heated to 90°C;

Cooling: left to cool to 45°C;

Fermentation: a tablespoon of yoghurt is diluted in a little milk and mixed with the rest of the milk;

Heating: heated for four hours at 40-45°C in an oven or in a pan with a lid to keep it warm; the mixture
should not move or be moved during processing;

Cooling: the yoghurt is stored at room temperature, then in a cold room, without moving it during the first 24
hours; it is consumed within 15 days.
For manufacturing firm yoghurt, yoghurt during manufacture is poured into of thick cloth or white muslin bag
(e.g. a pillowcase) and suspended a few hours to drip. It is then kept refrigerated for 20 days.
78
January 2014
Appendix 2: List of actors and institutions surveyed
INTERVIEWS BY ACTOR CATEGORY
Actor category
Persons interviewed
Livestock breeders
Producer group
THESgala
Rigas Ferraios Group
Palama and East Karditsa Group
Pilis-Mouzaki Group
Processors – dairy companies
Sales outlets (supermarkets, dairies)
Consulting companies
Mr Gkougkoulias
Mr Sdroulias – Mr Kitsios
Mr Karakostas
Mr Vaiopoulos – Mr Manouras
Mr Goussios
Mr Ifantis (Vasilopoulos supermarket)
Mr Georgiadis (KRINOS SA)
Wholesalers - distributors
Suppliers (animal feed)
Number of
interviews
57
2
3
2
1
20
17
1
2
12
DAVANTOB
Mr Leventakis
Mr Leventis
Ms Papaioannou
Mr Charakopoulos
Related industries
Tour operators
Ministry of Rural Development and Food
2
2
1
REGIONAL AUTHORITIES
Structure
Mr Agorastos
Mr Kouretas
Mr Kaliakoudas
Mr Paidis
Mr Spanos
Number of
interviews
2
4
2
1
2
Mr Kalfountzos
1
Mr Halatsis
Mr Tsiabalis
1
1
1
1
1
Persons interviewed
Secretary General of the Thessaly Region
Regional Council members
Directorate of Rural Development
Directorate of Agricultural and Veterinary Economics of
Larissa
Directorate of Agricultural and Veterinary Economics of
Magnesia
Veterinary Directorate
Industries Directorate
Trade Directorate
TYROGALA Management Committee
Mr Kouretas
LOCAL AUTHORITIES
Structure
Sofades deme
Mouzaki deme
Tempi deme
Riga Ferraiou deme
Persons interviewed
Mr Papadopoulos (mayor)
Mr Kehagias (deputy mayor)
Mr Kaminiotis (agronomist)
Mr Kotsos (mayor)
Mr Fragopoulos, Ms Kalliarra (agronomist)
Mr Kroupis
Mayor
Mr Asimakopoulos, Mr Mpethaves,
Mr Ziogkos (agronomists)
Ms Laitsou (mayor)
Ms Mpompoti (agronomist)
79
Number of
interviews
3
2
2/3
2
January 2014
SUPPORT STRUCTURES
Actors/ structures category
Persons interviewed
Control
The Animal Genetic Improvement Centre of Karditsa
Laboratory of animal feed transport control of Larissa
Veterinary laboratory of Larissa
Hellenic milk and meat organisation (ELOGAK)
Unified actor of food control (EFET)
Seminars, awareness, training, networking
DIMITRA training centre
Mr Hondos
Mr Dimitriadis
Mr Sagris
Ms Theodoridou
Ms Papadima
Mr Korobilias
Ms Kamateri,
Mr Dontas (Chairman)
Mr Giannakopoulos (Chairman)
Mr Pappas (Chairman)
Union of industry and companies of Thessaly
Chamber of Commerce and Craft Trades of Larissa
Chamber of Commerce and Craft Trades of Karditsa
Institute of Consumers
Union of Consumers
Karditsa Development Agency
Tourism
Magnesia hotel chambers
Larissa hotel associations
Number of
interviews
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
Mr Baltas, Mr Haliamalias
(agronomists)
1
Mr Leventis
Ms Papaioannou
2
2
RESEARCH CENTRES
Structure
Persons interviewed
Laboratory of animal feed hygiene
Department of livestock production
Laboratory of the physiology of cultured organisms
Laboratory of agriculture and plant physiology
Institute of fodder and pastures
Mr Gkovaris
Mr Goulas
Mr Kouretas
Mr Danalatos
Mr Vlahostergios
Number of
interviews
1
1
1
1
1
PARTICIPANTS AT THE RESEARCH CENTRES’ MEETING
Structure
Faculty of veterinary medicine/ laboratory animal feed hygiene
School of biochemistry, biotechnology/ laboratory of livestock breeding physiology
School of Agriculture-UTH/ Laboratory agriculture and plant physiology
INRA/ Institute of fodder and pastures
Technological Institute of Larissa/ Department of livestock production
Technological Institute of Larissa/ Department management and administration of projects
Technological Institute of Larissa/ Department of business administration
Technological Institute of Larissa/ Department of plant production
Hellenic Farm organisation ΔΗΜΗΤΡΑ - ΔΗΜΗΤΡΑ Centre
Participants
Mr Gkovaris
Mr Kouretas
Mr Danalatos
Mr Vlahostergios
Mr Goulas
Mr Sirakoulis
Ms Exarchou
Mr Theodosiou
Ms Bogiatzi
Μr Korobilias
In addition, face-to-face meetings were conducted with:

5 farmers’ groups (all Thessaly livestock breeder groups):

22 dairies (from the existing 75);

10 mayors and deputy mayors (12);

8 laboratories;

5 Chambers of Commerce, Industry and Craft Trades of Thessaly.

2 regional directorates.
These meetings allowed an understanding of the activities of the different actors and to exchange views on their
respective contribution to the functioning of the dairy chain.
80
January 2014
January 2014
LACTIMED aims to foster the production and distribution of typical and innovative dairy products in the
Mediterranean by organising local value chains, supporting producers in their development projects and
creating new markets for their products. The project is implemented under the ENPI CBC MED
Programme, and is financed, for an amount of EUR 4.35 million, by the European Union through the
European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument. From November 2012 to May 2015, ANIMA and
its 11 partners will organise a hundred operations targeting the various stakeholders of the dairy value
chains of Alexandria and Beheira (Egypt), the Bekaa and Baalbeck-Hermel (Lebanon), Bizerte and Beja
(Tunisia), Sicily (Italy) and Thessaly (Greece).
So as to encourage integrated development of the dairy chain in Thessaly, the project will base on a
diagnosis of this value chain and study opportunities in the national and international markets, thus
helping local authorities and support structures to adopt a strategy for promoting local typical dairy
products.
The diagnosis conducted from January to September 2013 involved the following steps:

Inventory of the dairy chain: literature review, identification of local stakeholders, interviews and
working groups with experts and key stakeholders,

Field survey with livestock farmers (57 questionnaires, 10 interviews), groups of farmers (3
questionnaires, 5 interviews), food-producing livestock (12 questionnaires, 2 interviews), dairies (19
questionnaires, 5 interviews), related industries (2 interviews), consumers unions (2 questionnaires),
distributors (2 interviews), points of sale and consumption (17 questionnaires, 3 interviews), touroperators (2 interviews), institutional bodies, local, regional and national (2 questionnaires, 17
interviews), R&D and training centers (8 questionnaires, 4 interviews), chambers and development
agencies (4 questionnaires, 3 interviews),

Identification and drafting of production specifications of 13 local typical dairy products,

Summary, definition of strategic priorities to ensure the development of the dairy chain and proposals
for the creation of a dairy cluster.
The results of the diagnosis were presented on 9 October 2013 at a regional restitution workshop in
Bizerte (Tunisia) and discussed with all the project partners and associates as well as with a panel of
Tunisian and international experts. The conclusions of these discussions have been incorporated into the
present report.
More information at: www.lactimed.eu
81

Developing the typical dairy products of Thessaly

Transcription

Similar documents

Q3 Brochure 11x17 ENG US email

mideast - Portal

You deserve

MICELI RICOTTA CHEESE TRADITIONAL Lipari Foods Item # 253649

PDF - DairiConcepts

New project for dairy entrepreneurs to be - Milk

- Les Producteurs de lait du Québec

Dr. Emilio de León Ponce de León, Director of Feeding and