Structural development of agriculture. Agricultural policy in DK and EU

Transcription

1 Raadvad 15. november 2013 Structural development of agriculture Agricultural policy in DK and EU Policy Officer

2 Raadvad 15. november 2013 Content: Part 1 Structurel development in Denmark Opening up the cycling of nutrients Farm structures Food production and consumption Part 2 Environmental regulation in Denmark Waterenvironment plans From generel regulation to targeted approach Part 3 The role of the EU? Trends and reforms What is the driving force? Part 4 The future farming

3 Nutrient balances History - nutrient balances in Danish agriculture: Until the mid-50s sale/output based on photosynthesis From the 50s: the Industrialization of agriculture. Input of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, etc. Manure - important part of the ecological cycle or waste product? Massive expansion of agricultural land through drainage etc.

4 Nutrient balances Closed cycle Figur fra videnskabelige undersøgelser i Beras-projektet

5 3,7 4,7 5,6 3,0 1,0 4,2 9,7 15,0 13,0 11,1 10,0 23,5 22,7 24,7 22,6 22,1 23,0 20,7 26,3 34,2 32,3 38,6 37,6 34,2 30,9 35,4 36,1 39,8 40,9 44,4 60,5 68,5 Selected comparative data and figures Share of Agricultural holdings divided according to holding sizes ,0 70,0 60,0 50,0 % 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 Denmark Sweden Germany Finland Estonia Latvia Lithuania Poland <5ha 5-<20ha 20-<50ha >=50ha Source: European Commission, Eurostat:

6 Selected comparative data and figures % Utilised agricultural area ,0 61,4 60,0 Livestock units per hectare of utilised agricultural area Develop-ment % 50,0 46,8 46,2 43,8 Denmark 1,71 1,72 0,6 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 28,9 21,6 7,5 7,5 Germany 1,10 1,06-3,6 Poland 0,77 0,72-6,5 Sweden 0,59 0,57-3,4 Finland 0,53 0,50-5,7 Lithuania 0,47 0,39-17,0 Estonia 0,41 0,35-14,6 Latvia 0,31 0,28-9,7 Source: European Commission, Eurostat:

7 Selected comparative data and figures Livestock density index (livestock units per ha of utilised agricultural area) Source: Policy Recommendations to Save the Baltic Sea: Conversion to Ecological Recycling Agriculture (Editors:, Sofi Gerber and Per Wramner)

8 DK agriculture economic analysis Agricultural exchange ratio (selling prices / costs)

9 DK agriculture economic analysis Prices of cereal and bread in Denmark The grain share of the price of bread

10 DK agriculture economic analysis The food share of total consumption

11 DK agriculture economic analysis We spend relatively less money on food Food products Leisure and entertainment

12 DK agriculture economic analysis Calories per capita

13 Water environment planning Nitogen balance for agricultural area DK Kilde: Vandmiljø og Natur NOVANA. Tilstand og udvikling faglig sammenfatning. Aarhus Universitet, DCE Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi, Nitrogen loss is reduced by half until 2003 Need for further reduction approx. 40%

14 Water environment planning Begivenheder Virkemidler og nationale handlingsplaner Omkostningseffektivitet i kr./kg N Renseanlæg: Krav til udledning af N og P 70 Industriudledni Renses bedst muligt 121 nger: Landbrug: VMP I Sædskifte, gødningsplaner, gødningopbev., mm 6,4 Handlingsplan N-normer, SFL, skærpet gødningsopv.krav 24 VMP II Bedre foderudnyttelse 0 - Etablering af vådområder 5,2 - Efterafgrøder, skovrejsning, nedsat N-norm 24 - Skærpede harmonikrav Økologisk jordbrug 157 Kilde: Jørgensen et al: Miljøintegration i EU s landbrugspolitik, DØR 2009

15 Vandmiljø - Vandplaner Basis analysis WFD /3 af reduktion i Limfjorden og Jyllands Lillebæltsopland

16 Common agricultural policy Opening of nutrient cycles Industrialization of agriculture Income in agriculture is lagging behind industrial workers 1980: Self-sufficiency 100 % Surplus production Increasing environmental problems Depopulation of rural areas 2004: 10 new memberstates, lacking of legitimacy for increasing budget Beginning of CAP Objective: Income support, food self-sufficiency in EU, increased productivity, market protection Customs and export subsidies Stocks of butter, meat, etc. Milk quotas and intervention Coupled Direct payments 1992: Mc. Sharry reform: Set aside, Reduction og export subsidies Agenda 2000: Decoupled Single Payment, Cross Compliance, Rural development Program 2008: Health tjeck: No set aside, increased modulation 2013: CAP-reform

17 Common agricultural policy Source: Statusrapport, Natur og Landbrugskommissionen, 2012

18

19 CAP-reform 2013 Pillar 1 Support structure with Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 maintained Objective Pillar 1: - Income Support, ensure food supply and consumer prices - Single payment per hectare granted to all farmers - Cross-compliance requirements Greening of Pillar 1 Commission: Public money for public goods Want to raise the bar with the general requirements for all farmers - 30% made dependent on: 1) Protection permanent grassland 2) Crop diversification 3) Ecological focus areas (EFA) - All holdings under 15 ha exempt 3) => 89% of use / 35% area - Only farms> 30ha should have more than 3 crops => 94% of use / 46% of land Less effective in DK effectiveness in other countries?

20 CAP-reformen 2013 Pillar 2 Pillar 2 the Rural Development Program (RDP) - Objective: Development of rural areas through: Improving competitiveness: restructuring, development and innovation Improving the environment and countryside through land management Improving quality of life in rural areas, diversification of economic activity. General regulation through Cross Compliance and Greening in Pillar 1 Targeted action - targeted measures in Pillar 2 Minor overall reduction in Budget more in Pillar 2 than in Pillar 1

21 CAP-reform 2013 Flexibility Flexibility Pillar 1: Up to MS to define national greening measures equivalens => MS can choose to make greening effective or meaningless! Flexibility Pillar 2: Up to MS to define targeted national and regional measures Modulation: Transfer of funds from Pillar 1 to Pillar 2: Option to 15% of direct aid can be transferred to Pillar 2 Rural funds - without national cofinancing. Invers modulation: Selected countries can transfer up to 25% of the rural development funds to direct support - thereby saving national co-financing Decision on modulation must be taken quickly: 31/ concerning / concerning The most important environmental decision of the decade!

22 Euro CAP Pillar 2 Rural Development Program, DK Årligt EU-bidrag til Søjle Inkl. sundhedstjek Basisbevilling Denmark: Increased modulation after health-tjeck in 2008

23 Euro CAP Pillar 2 Rural Development Program, DK Årligt EU-bidrag til Søjle Inkl. sundhedstjek Basisbevilling Denmark: Without modulation: Reduction in rural development funds, Pillar 2 in 2020 compared to 2013 (fixed prices): minus 25.5% Reduction in direct support Pillar 1: Without modulation 20.4%

24 Euro CAP Pillar 2 Rural Development Program, DK Årligt EU-bidrag til Søjle Inkl. 15 % modulation Inkl. sundhedstjek Basisbevilling Max. Modulation 15%: Annual million Euro to 977 million DKK Reducing direct support: With max. Modulation 32.3%

25 Environmental regulation in Denmark and EU Denmark 1973: Environmental law 1985: NPO-actionplan 1987: Water environmental plan I 1997: Water environmental plan II 2003: Target met halving of N-loss Water environmental plan III Waterplans acc. to WFD not yet agreed! EU 1979: Bird Protection Directive 1992: Habitats Directive Natura 2000 (UN: Biodiversity Convention) 1996: IPPC Directive (IE) 2000: Water Framework Directive 2009: Sust. Use of Pesticide Directive The driving force?

26 Environmental regulation in Denmark and EU The driving force? Political composition of parliament - the government's environmental profile and strength? In MS and EU? EU membership has meant that there is now environmental regulation in all countries! (Nitrates Directive, Water Framework Directive, Habitats, EIA, etc.) - Ex. Poland: Helsinki Convention 1999 Water Law 2001 Nitrates Directive and EU membership in 2004, Cross Compliance from 2009, LDP 2007 The environmental challenges, agricultural development status and the existing regulatory approaches are very different in different MS and regions in the EU! It is therefore a very difficult task to design environmental regulations under the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, which has real impact everywhere. The necessary targeted approach related to local conditions and challenges must necessarily be designed nationally and locally. Environmental success depends on political status in MS!

27 Future Globale trends AGRIMONDE GO (AGO) Business as usual Population growth to 9 billion by 2050 (UN) Food supply increases by 20%, animal feed increases from 16 to 23% Total food requirements 2050 increases by 90% Area under cultivation increases by 7 million ha per year The greatest increase in Latin America and Sub- Saharan Africa AGRIMONDE 1 Sustainability scenario Population growth to 9 billion by 2050 (UN) Food supply as the global average in 2000: 3000 kcal / person / day (500 kcal animal) => Modified diet - reduced meat consumption Total food requirements 2050 increases by 35% Cultivated land increased by 12 million hectares per year The greatest increase in Latin America and sub- Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Yield Level is the driving force - yields rising by 1.14% / year Not addressed: Sust. cultivation => yield increase 0.14%/year Preservation of soil fertility priority Innovation and technology diffusion Resource Scarcity: Phosphorus, energy, water, etc. Social instability, conflicts More comprehensive climate change Læs mere: -

28 Future farming? Food producing and food security will always be the central objectives. Agriculture need to be economical and socially sustainable => farmers should be able to enjoy a reasonable income Sustainable production is a must nature, biodiversity, climate, environment Several possible strategies: Organic Lowinput Ecological Recycling Agriculture High tech agriculture

29 Organic farming Is organic the solution? - 100% organic? + - pesticides, animal welfare? waterenvironment, climate, nature Organic Plus o Ex. Lowinput or climate High Nature Value Farming? weak definition targets unclear - New tool: HNV-indicator-map Need for holistic solutions - systemic solutions? Need for clarity about goals!

30 Low-input farming Ecological Recycling Agriculture (ERA): Organic farming that integrates crop and livestock production in a balance where the aim is self-sufficiency in nutrients and feed The number of animal units per. ha is relatively low ( ) Sales of products are mainly local. ERA has the potential to: lower the leaching of nitrogen and phosphorous around 50% reduce greenhouse gas emissions improve soil fertility avoid synthetic pesticides enhance biodiversity ERA: Ecological Recycling Agriculture BERAS Implementation project read more at and

31 Low-input farming How can we use low-input farming in environmental regulation? Measures should be simple, well-defined and easy to control Possible top-up measures to Organic farming: N-norm - max 80 kg N / ha A minimum of 30% perennial crops in rotation Support for clovergrass Used as a general instrument: - Risk of large deadweight + Increased effort to keep farm type - Important to clarify the objective! Used as targeted instrument => Alternative to extensification / permanent grassland

32 High-tech agriculture The current agricultural structure will not change overnight. Therefore it s important to consider how to regulate intensive farming. There are many possibilities to minimize loss of nutrients from intensive farming: o Optimizing handling of manure / slurry in stables BAT (Types of floor, cooling of slurry, roof on slurry tank, etc.) o Optimizing handling of manure / slurry on the field BAT o Biogas reduces ammonia emissions o Prolongation of lactation period, efficiency in feeding? o Improved pesticide spraying technologies BAT o Extensifikation of vulnerable land is always a must! A great need for regulation of big intensive livestockfactories, also in new Memberstates - bookkeeping systems need to be developed

33 Project : Future farming Scenarios for sustainable farming 4 scenarios: 1. Environment and climate optimization 2. High biodiversity 3. The bio-based agriculture/ resource optimization 4. Low input / Rural development scenario

34 Thanks for listening! More information at: