Italian LPIS upgrade refresh project

Transcription

1 Italian LPIS upgrade refresh project Maurizio Piomponi: AGEA Pierpaolo Guerra: SIN 15th

2 First implementation of LPIS Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pastures eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 2

3 First implementation of LPIS Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pastures eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 3

4 First implementation of LPIS In the years Italy as first country in Europe realized a survey of all not eligible areas within declared cadastral parcels. The work, done under the supervision of JRC, was based on panchromatic aerial images at nominal scale 1:10,000 scale and 1 m pixel. Ortofoto

5 First implementation of LPIS At the time the LPIS was firstly established several activities had to be realized in order to make it usable within a GIS: maps had to be digitized for 2/3 of the country coordinates transformation, with the required precision, was performed from cadastral reference system to national one boundaries of all declared parcels have been digitized eligible and not eligible areas has been identified within all digitized parcels (from not eligible areas registry SNE registry update ) After the GIS implementation the database has been constantly updated through: new orthoimagery for one third of the national territory each year updated cadastral information received by the cadastral agency annual photo-interpretation of all the newly declared parcels and on the ones with eligibility anomalies returns from Controls with Remote Sensing or On the Spot 5

6 The drivers for a change In the last years the context of utilization of LPIS has changed quite significantly: CAP reform startup in 2005 with issue like: total and partial decoupling entitlement assignment cross compliance other regimes included in SPS: olive oil (decoupled), nuts and tobacco (partially coupled) 2006 fruits and vegetables 2008 vineyards

7 The drivers for change Remarks from EU auditors over some point of weakness of the system causing the information being not totally reliable: derived from images not always updated not in line with some modifications occured in EU regulations problems of lack of omogeneity and incomplete interpretation due to the scarse corrispondance of the cadastral parcel to the reality of agricultural assets cicle of update not scheduled in completely rational way 7

8 The upgrade project LPIS upgrade ( refresh project ) has been started in 2007 to remove those points of weakness by means of the following basic elements: land cover photo-interpretation not constrained by cadastral boundaries but realized as an continuous layer (physical block approach). basic land cover legend distinguishing agricultural areas (eligible for payements) and not agricultural areas /not eligible for payments) higher ortho-imagery quality (RGB+IR pixel 50 cm.) 3 years update cycle usage of a huge amount of ancillary data deriving from others registry (vineyard, olive tree, nuts, ) preserving the value of historical information complete coverage of the entire national territory ( sq.km not limited to the parcels declared for subsidies application) 8

9 The drivers for change Main goals of the project in brief Setting up an up to date, complete and homogeneous set of information for the entire national territory Mapping agricultural surfaces in coherence with new requirements (i.e. stronger integration of 1 and 2 pillar, cross compliance, ) Defining a baseline layer certified through an administrative procedure involving the farmers and their representative bodies 9

10 Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pasture eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 10

11 Project schedule 2007 and % of the entire national area 2009 the last 33% aerial VHR imagery acquisition photo-interpretation quality controls 11

12 Main project s features The project started implementing a new homogeneous layer on the entire national territory where the classification of agricultural surfaces is not limited from cadastral boundaries but based on a physical block approach Digital orthophotos at nominal scale 1: scale, working scale between 1:2.000 and 1: Minimun mapping elements defined for any class Detailad user manual for photointerpretes Exhaustive training Strict quality controls 12

13 Main project s features The new classification were based on 3 major groups: Not agricultural land cover (A), agricultural land cover (B), agricultural land use (C) from previous registry data Not agricultural areas Decription A NOT AGRICULTURAL AREAS Code Woods / Forest 650 Artefact (building, roads, ) 660 Water surfaces 690 Generic not eligible areas 770 Tare (small not eligible areas)

14 Main project s features Agricultural land cover and land use Description B AGRICULTURAL AREAS Code Pasture (no tares) 638 Rough pasture (tare up to 20%) 659 Rough pasture (tare up to 50%) 654 Arable land 666 Permanent greenhouse 557 Permanent crops (specialized) 651 Mixed permanent crops 685 Arboreto consociabile (con coltivazioni erbacee) 655 Aree di servizio funzionali alla coltura (*) 779 C AGRICULTURAL AREAS (photointerpretation + registries AGEA) Wineyard 410 Olive 420 Citrus 430 Carob 491 Almond 493 Hazelnuts 494 Walnuts 495 Pistachio

15 New targets To give new value to the huge effort provided by the basic geometric photo-interpretation a second set of targets was defined Landscape elements New goals of the project are: Increase the thematic accuracy of notagricultural land giving priority to forestry integrating National Forestry Inventory points together with other consolidated Land Cover information and new thematic extraction by infrared false colour Identification of specific landscape elements relevant to Good Agro-Environmental Conditions (GAEC) or Rural Development measures definition and controls (i.e. Tree rows, hedges, areas with terraces or stone walls, erosion, etc.).

16 New targets - procedure Automatic ri-classification Ancillary data and vector reference cartography Use of raster data RGB e IR, DTM, DSM Revision by photo-identterpretatiom 16 16

17 New targets landscape features Elements classified as (small) not eligible areas from the purposes of SPS are revised in a wider point of view using a deeper level classification not eligible areas tree row Basic operating procedure Small not eligible areas (tare) are reclassified as their actual land cover (tree rows or group distinguished from rocks or other not agricultural elements) Generic wood or natural class is distinguished on the specific forest classes (by means of infra-red imagery and by interpolation with other LC maps) Antrophized areas are partitioned among the specific elements (roads, buildings, )

18 Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pasture eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 18

19 Rough pastures eligibility evaluation CE Reg. 796/04 art. 8 states par. 1 A parcel that contains trees shall be considered an agricultural parcel for the purposes of the arearelated aid schemes provided that agricultural activities referred to in Article 51 of Regulation (EC) 1782/2003 or, where applicable, the production envisaged can be carried out in a similar way as on parcels without trees in the same area. Morover the European Commision when approving health check measures has stated: as far as traditional rough pastures within woods and with limestone rocks are concerned, not suitable characteristics can be deducted by means of the application of an appropriate coefficient 19

20 Rough pastures eligibility evaluation LPIS Photointepretation distinguish 3 different land cover classes for pastures, though eligibility for grazing requires also a land use approach pasture with no reduction (rough) pasture reduction 20% In many situations grazing take place in areas photointerpreted as woods because of foliage cover exceeding the limits defined for pasture classes (rough) pasture reduction 50% Though undergrowth is actually suitable for grazing 20

21 Rough pastures eligibility evaluation In order to manage the given situation, forest/wood grazing, ensuring the correct supply of subsidies and at the same time preserving the rigths of those farmers exerting traditional agricultural practices, a specific 2 steps control procedure has been defined: Ad hoc administrative controls for all these parcels photointerpreted as woods in LPIS upgrade project for which an application under SPS has been presented On the spot controls for those not already included in historical pastures register (declared, controlled and payed as pastures in the reference period for entitlemnt assignment) Historical rough pastures declared and controlled in reference period used fo entitlements assignment undergo administrative controls alone 21

22 Specific administrative controls In order to be considered eligible for payment under SPS these rough pastures have to accomplish the following conditions: Grazing by own livestock declared within national livestock register (BDN) Grazing by other applicant livestock with proper indication of CUAA (unique farm code) and specific demonstrating documentation Grazing by own or third party animals different from bovine or ovine not registred in BDN (swine, horses) Grass mowing for forage for usage within own farm demonstrated by livestock BDN code or farming for other animals not registred in BDN forage for selling (presemce of sales invoice) Force majeure related to farming (epizootic disease properly documented) 22

23 On the Spot controls On the Spot controls are carried out in order to define the actual eligibility yhat is the evidence of livestock grazing. As first step at least one of the following conditions have to be found: actual presence of livestock (bovine, ovine, swine or horses) in field evidence of animal dropping from the above enumerated species actual presence of mowing agricultural machinery and tracks or footprint of livestock evidence of actual grazing or tree bark eating by livestock evidence of mowed vegetation on areas under control actual presence of gathered hay presence of livestock drinking tor eating presence of fences showing pasture rotation practices presence of permanent or mobile animal shelter proximity to stables or folds 23

24 On the Spot controls A second goal of the field control, where the previously listed eligibility conditions are satisfied, is the evaluation of the eligibility % reduction valuated on the undergrouth (actual presence of grass) Should the land parcel result totally not accessible to animals the wood/forest classification (not eligibility condition) has to be confirmed. In all other situations, in addition to the wood/forest classification a specific code (UNAR) describing the % (on the ground) eligibility of the parcel has to be applied: Pasture with trees and no reduction Pasture with trees and 50% reduction 24

25 On the Spot controls Pasture with grass coverage between % (no reduction) 25

26 On the Spot controls Pasture with grass coverage between % (no reduction) 26

27 On the Spot controls Pasture with undergrowth grass between 80% and 95% (20% reduction) 27

28 On the Spot controls Pasture with trees with undergrowth grass cover between 50% and 80% (50% reduction) 28

29 On the Spot controls Not grazeable wood 29

30 Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pastures eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 30

31 DATA PUBLICATION IN THE IACS Farm classification Communication to the farmer Management of re-view instances at farm level Conclusion of the administrative procedure 31

32 Data publication in the IACS The publication in the IACS is done by the integration of new techincal data with the information declared by the farmers in the farm s registry by automatic interpolation of land cover information and farm s properties consolidated by the centers for assistance to farmers (CAA) 32

33 Farm classification Comparing new technical data with information declared in the farm s registry all farms are firstly classified as below: Farms with farm register data in concordance with new data Farms with farm register data not in concordance with new data at parcel/block level but compensating at farm level Farms with farm register data not in concordance with new data and as further criteria: Farms with no effect on the amount of subsidies claimed Farms where penalties on the payment are triggered To all farmers with not concordance situation (approx ) have been sent personalized letters explaining the project, describing farm situation, the possible consequences over payments, providing indication over web consultation of farm s data, on how to have access to the administrative procedure, etc. 33

34 Management of re-view instances In order to manage the re-view instances from farmers several different ways has been set up: Web consultation (directly over the internet by the farmer itself or at a Centre for Assistance to Farmers offices - CAA) Call center support Front-end -> Back-office connection Farmer remarks sent to back-office directly by means of the online procedure Back-office processing On-line consultation of back-office results (an answer to the an (answers to farmers are always due!) Meeting planning and management Field survey (when field survey confirm the technical data of the administration costs are charged to the farmer) 34

35 Administrative procedure conclusion The administrative procedure ends when: Acceptance by web application Reception of remarks from the farmer No reply /Tacitus consensus Final report drafted afterward the meeting with the farmer Certification of all information in farm register 35

36 Agenda Background and drivers of the project Implementation phase Rough pastures eligibility evaluation Management of new data within IACS Reuse of LPIS information within Italian PA 36

37 Inter-administrative framework Geographical information has become of crucial importance in administrative procedures management among different PA, requiring: availability of geographical layers through Spatial Data Infrastructures, under the principles defined by INSPIRE directive; uniqueness of reference information - among which land cover is one of the basic layer to a wide number of procedures that presently involve agricultural and forestry sector with other national P.A. such as: Subsidies controls (AGEA coordination, Paying Agencies and Regions) Planning of Rural Development measures (Ministry of Agriculture Regional administrations and Paying agencies) National Registry of agro-forest carbon sink under Kyoto Protocol specifications (Forestry Agency and Ministry of Environment) Forest Fire prevention (Forestry Agency, Civil Protection Departmentment and Regional administrations)

38 LPIS reuse In Italy as in many other EU countries the LPIS represents the most upto-date and detailed source on land cover information realized and maintained with great efforts by the Agricultural Paying Agencies Efforts has to be done for defining the way to make it become an asset available/usable to all P.A. in order to properly manage the different cross-sector activities The strategy AGEA is promoting at all level of PA is looking for the widest possible involvement of different entities as the Center for IT in Public Administration (CNIPA), the Institute for Protection of Environment (ISPRA), the Center for Geographic Information Systems of Regional administration (CISIS) is: - share specifications for higher precision products - encourage reuse and shared access though SDI

39 Sharing specifications Sharing specifications has to be done at all level of information: Updated ortho-photos and DEMs - in order to have standardized and exchangeable products (national specifications are under approval of the National Committee for technical rules of geographical information and ready to be issued as a national law) LPIS and large scale land cover - identified as the next working task within a specific technical group of the National Committee for technical rules of geographical information (present situation among PA shows different: legend, scale, minimum detectable area, etc.) The national 1: orthophoto specification have been defined in complete coherence with the technical guidelines issued by JRC for quality checking of ortho imagery

40 Expected outcome Sharing specifications can then trigger the ability of sharing acquisition processes among different PA either of reference information (orto-photo / DEM) or thematic data with many positive outcome other then the already mentioned improvement in common administrative procedures management: general reduction of expenditure for PA increase of updating rate general improvement in terms of scale, precision, resolution AGEA is working on specific agreements for reuse and collaboration in the area of remote sensing and cartography with: CISIS: center for coordination of regional administrations for reuse and standardization of spatial data CNR: national research council for experimental activities on remote sensing DPC: national civic protection agency for spatial data sharing (to be signed next week)

41 Conclusion A good quality LPIS is of the outmost importance for a good management of CAP and to ensure the proper assignment of subsidies to farmers It is also an extremely useful geographic database for purposes outside the scope of CAP itself We believe that the huge efforts put in LPIS upgrade projects all over Europe represent the best guarantee for EU funds and then require an appropriate regulation framework aimed at an actual control of the quality of LPIS s itself We then pay great attention at the proposed action plan on the Quality Assurance Framework

42 THANK YOU FOR THE ATTENTION! 42