Radio România Internațional

Tag: society

  • Food loss, an issue in Romania

    Food loss, an issue in Romania

    While some parts of the world are confronted with a severe lack of food, in many other countries tons of food products are discarded every year. And we are not talking about small amounts. According to the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) one third of the food produced for human consumption gets lost every year, and this is an amount 3 times bigger than what is necessary to feed all people on earth.



    In the European Union food loss exceeds 89 million tons, 2.5% of this loss being reported in Romania alone, according to FAO statistics made public between 2006 and 2012. No studies have been conducted in Romania on this matter since 2012, so, at present we do not know how much and what type of food Romanians throw away.



    The aforementioned study itself was made based on estimates by the European Commission, taking the situation in the Nordic countries as a model. However, even estimated figures are staggering. The wastage level is 49% for households, 37% for the food industry, 7% for the retail industry, 5% for the public food sector and 2% for the agricultural sector. So what is to be done to decrease these figures?



    In 2013 a working group was set up within the Romanian Agriculture Ministry with the task of drawing up a National Strategy for Fighting Food Loss. After 3 years nothing was done in this regard. There were also some parliamentary initiatives, one of which was green lighted by the Senate at the end of last year.



    Cosmin Zaharia, an editor with the “Green Report” online magazine has details: “There have been two legislative initiatives in this respect in Romania’s Parliament, one proposed by the National Union for the Progress of Romania and another one by the National Liberal Party. The first one, which was passed by the Senate, obliges supermarkets to donate to NGOs the food nearing its expiration date. However, there are no provisions as to the way in which distribution from retailers to the people in need should be made. It is expensive for the supermarkets to also arrange for the transport and distribution and to also make sure the food is properly stored.”



    Until clear-cut legislation is passed in this respect, it is up to the private sector and charity organizations to curb food loss. The SOMARO community shop for example offers food and non-food products at very small prices for the needy. As far as food products are concerned, they meet all quality and safety standards but they are close to the expiration date or the season when they are usually sold is over, such as the Santa-shaped chocolate usually sold on Christmas.



    The shop manager is Simon Suitner, an Austrian who settled in Romania six years ago: “We use our own car to collect the products and then we take them to special shops in Bucharest and Sibiu. In Bucharest almost 700 families benefit from these products while in Sibiu 250. In these special shops, customers have access based on an ID card issued by the Social Assistance Authority in the two cities. The products are sold at discounts of 80% up to 90%. We have chosen to sell them, even at a very small price, so as to afford paying our employees by ourselves. Moreover, our customers know that they are not begging, this being a dignified way for them to get the products they need at a very small price. Among our customers are people with various social statuses, and what they have in common is a maximum income of 500 lei per month for each family member. Most of them, however, don’t even have this amount. There are families in which one or several members have disabilities, chronic diseases or families with many children.”



    The products offered to these people, products which otherwise would have gone to waste, are brought to SOMARO, based on a collaboration contract with producers and distributors. Simon Suitner does not collaborate much with big retailers.



    Next he will tell us why: “Unfortunately, it is difficult to discuss with retailers about the food waste issue. It’s not my intention to offend anyone, but I would like to tell you about the Austrian community shops where there is the following moral dilemma: if I have a product that meets all safety norms but which does not sell, is it moral to let it turn into waste when I know there are people who can’t afford buying the food they need? Unfortunately people in Romania do not ask themselves this question very often.”



    But Romania does have a law under which retailers get a 20% tax reduction if they make contributions to charities. Unfortunately, each time companies wait for a specific decision by Parliament or Government to take any action in this respect. Meanwhile, Romanians throw away about 25% of their cooked food, 21% of the bread and bakery products they buy, 19% of vegetables and 16% of fruits. The reasons for this waste are: quick deterioration in the case of 26% of the products, the wrong estimation of the amount of food products needed to prepare a meal which occurs in 21% of the cases, and excessive shopping accounting for 14% of the cases. Until food loss prevention laws are passed, raising awareness over this issue is one way of fighting food waste.



    But that is not enough, says journalist Cosmin Zaharia: “People should also be educated as to how products are tagged. And I refer to the expiration date. Some food products can be eaten even after their expiration date, such as pasteurized food, and canned fruits and vegetables. They can still be eaten shortly after they expire. But educating people is useless unless you also offer them the means to fight food loss.”



    Recently the NGOs’ initiative of stopping food loss has been joined by famous chefs, who, through their personal example, show people how to prepare meals without wasting the food products used.

  • The Civic Spirit in Bucharest’s Neighborhoods

    The Civic Spirit in Bucharest’s Neighborhoods

    Built in the late 60s, on the then Bucharest outskirts, after several decades Drumul Taberei neighborhood turned into something more than a bedroom-neighborhood as it used to be called. Among the blocks of four, eight or ten floors, schools, kindergartens, medical offices and a even cinema was built, part of a compound that also used to host a sweets and pastry shop, a general department store, a photo shop and a hair shop. A small square was also built, for young people to have a place to meet. So, the neighborhood got a centre around which people could build a community. However, for 17 years now the “Favorit” cinema hall has been closed, and the commercial area has been fully transformed. So people living in the area have decided to set up an association to bring the cinema back to life. Here is one of its members, Marilena Trica, telling us about the purpose of their initiative.



    It’s actually a group of friends, neighbors and just citizens who want the same thing, to bring the Favorit cinema and the community centre back to life. We set up this association in 2010, with the help of the Resource Centre for Public Participation. Back in 2010, Centre representatives knocked on the doors of 120 apartments and invited citizens to a discussion about their problems. Although we had not expected it, half of them came to the meeting. They were asked to write on a piece of paper what they would like to happen in their area. The surprise was that they all wanted Favorit cinema to be rendered functional again. And this is how our group was born. We have around 300 members in our data base, 10 of them being the active members of the group.”



    What these people want is not just for the cinema to be reopened, but to turn the old Favorit compound into a cultural centre, to host theatre performances and concerts, a place for young people to spend their free time and for children to participate in various educational activities, actually to have the place become the ‘heart of the community’ again, as sociologist Mircea Kivu called it.



    “The neighbourhoods in a city need more than just utilities, and if we talk strictly about functions, Drumul Taberei has everything it needs. It has cinema halls in malls, and plenty of shopping areas. But apart from that, a neighbourhood also needs what I would call ‘symbolic landmarks’, that is, places where people can meet as neighbours, not simply as consumers, places where the community life can unfold. These neighbourhoods need to develop as communities, not as mere agglomerations of inhabitants.”



    Although the communist regime destroyed this sense of association and collectivity, as of recently small groups from various towns or neighbourhoods have started to act as communities. In Drumul Taberei there are a few other initiative groups, such as “Callatis Drumul Taberei Group” or the “Tudor Vladimirescu Initiative,” while in another part of Bucharest a group called “Lacul Tei” has been set up. When people feel they belong to a community, the civic spirit is at work. Sociologist Mircea Kivu knows of other similar initiatives, in other towns:



    “There is a recent one in Iasi, in the north-east, a group of people who oppose the idea of cutting down the linden trees downtown. And I’ve heard about another beautiful initiative in Oradea, where a group came together to restore a shopping area and rebuild it as a community center. We are beginning to see more of this kind of initiatives, with people freely deciding to get organized. Without this, authorities will only do what they choose to.”


    Marilena Trica tells us what the members of the “Favorit Initiative” managed to get from the authorities:



    “We’ve made a lot of petitions, requests for explanations in the meetings of the local council, we issued press releases. We even had arguments with them, and here is what we achieved. In 2011, the funding was approved and a feasibility study was conducted for the Favorit Project. In 2012, money was allotted from the local budget and the blueprint and technical specifications were put together. We were thrilled to hear that in 2013 2.6 million euros was earmarked for the implementation of the project. Unfortunately, we are still in this phase, because the City Hall does not own the cinema building. The owner is the Ministry of Culture, through an agency called RADEF, which we are currently fighting to get ownership rights, so that the City Hall may proceed with the investment. So we keep petitioning.”



    At present, the project is blocked due to bureaucratic issues between the ”RomaniaFilm” State Owned Film Distribution and Exploitation Company (RADEF), which abandoned the cinema hall, and Bucharest’s District 6 City Hall, which cannot take it over. Nevertheless, Marilena Trica and her colleagues from the “Favorit Initiative” waste no time and keep bombarding the authorities with letters about what they would like to change about their district:



    “Here is what a letter I sent to the Culture Ministry sounded like: <> Here is another letter that we sent to the District 6 City Hall: “No pansies and kerbs in District 6. Funds, willingness and education for Favorit Cinema.”



    In time, civic actions have started to pay off. On September 26, when “Neighbourhood’s Day” was celebrated, members of the Favorit Initiative managed to persuade authorities to open the cinema’s doors once again. Two short films were screened in the hallway, and the large number of spectators gave them hope that, maybe, together they will eventually succeed.



  • Risks for mothers and children in Romania

    Risks for mothers and children in Romania

    The well-being of mothers and children in a given state is not only an indicator of economic growth, but also of the efficiency of social policies. Unfortunately, in Romania this indicator is rather poor, according to an international survey launched by the “Save the Children” Organisation. Conducted on an annual basis for the last 15 years, the survey includes a study on Romania, for which data provided by the National Statistics Institute were contrasted with information from Europe-wide mother and child health research. Adina Clapa, a member of “Save the Children” Romania, gives us details, based on official 2012 data:



    Adina Clapa: “The survey covers 178 countries. We realized that, once again, in terms of the best countries to raise your children in, topping the standings are the Nordic states, with Finland ranking first. Romania is once again, for the 15th time, the last in the EU and 65th in the world. Romania has the highest infant mortality rate, nine per thousand, which is almost double the European average of 4.3 per thousand. The absolute figure is nearly 1,812 deaths among children less than one year of age. This is disquieting and shameful. Premature birth is the main cause, followed by breathing or digestive disorders and household accidents. The conclusion is that one-third of these deaths can be prevented.”



    Besides poverty, one of the causes of the problems facing women and children in Romania is the level of education and information of mothers to be. Many of them do not see a doctor for regular check-ups and after birth they do not have their babies seen by doctors either. The situation has not improved lately, as shown by another study made by “Save the Children”. Ciprian Porumbaru, a member of the foundation, explains:



    Ciprian Porumbaru: “The study was conducted in all the 28 EU Member States, and also in Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. We saw that 28% of the children, including young people up to 18, are threatened by poverty and social exclusion. This happens against the backdrop of a deep gap between rich and poor, as the study has also revealed. On the other hand, the percentage in Romania is significantly higher, almost double, as 52% of the children are in this situation. We actually share the first position with Bulgaria. Another element highlighted by the study, which is very important in Romania’s case, is that although household work is at the highest levels in Europe, still many children live in poverty. Another important conclusion is that in Romania poverty particularly affects children, whose social exclusion risk rate is 13% more than among grown-ups.“



    Given that Romanians work harder and more hours than other peoples, why is the poverty risk higher? A possible answer could be the lower salaries they get. Ciprian Gradinaru also attempts an answer:



    Ciprian Gradinaru: “The labour intensity indicator measures how many members of a household are employed. In Romania more members of a household need to work for the family to be able to survive. And so we reach the sensitive issue of child exploitation through labour. A large number of children from Romania are active economically, and not only in the rural areas. That is why, even if the labour intensity index is high in Romania, this does not entail a lower poverty level.”



    Another NGO, World Vision, has approached the degree of children’s involvement in supporting the household. Here is Daniela Buzducea, advocacy director with World Vision Romania:



    Daniela Buzducea: “We were glad to note that Romania’s economic growth last year, which was reported as significant, albeit somewhat surprising, was also reflected in a general increase in living standards. There was a drop from 75 to 66% in the number of families who say they find it difficult to cover their daily needs. What is however worrying and sad is the fact that this increase in living standards is not reflected in children’s case. For example, the number of children who say they go to bed hungry has grown by 2%, as has the number of children who say they have to work and sometimes miss school because of this. This refers to work performed in their own households or for their neighbours for more than 2 hours per day.”



    Poverty and the fact that children have to work also explain the high dropout rates. European funds may be a solution, provided they are spent wisely and efficiently. Another solution may be an inter-institutional collaboration between the education system, the social protection system and local authorities, to create a stronger feeling of solidarity and community that could prevent school dropout.