Annex 3 Summary of ms assessments
Download 257.38 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Poland
NetherlandsGeneral overview of the situation in Rural Areas in the MS Approximately 56% of the total Dutch area (including water) is used for agricultural production. The agriculture sector makes up 10% of the total national workforce (agriculture and its related sectors). However, the number of farms has fallen by 28 % in the last 10 years. The productivity of the Dutch agricultural and food sector is 2.5 times higher than the average in Europe. Rural areas in Holland are characterised by the wide diversity of natural landscapes, including dykes, ditches, ponds and rivers, which sometimes flood. The area of nature is stable; there is even growth in the area of forest. The Dutch rural areas are classified as high peri-urban in character. Grasslands account for about 54% of all agricultural land. Most farms are effectively managed and worked intensively with mechanical equipment. The many cooperatives have added to the efficiency of production and distribution. Agriculture production is characterised by a high number of intensive livestock farms and horticulture holdings. The number of animals kept per hectare is around 4 times higher as in the EU-27 (3.26 livestock units (LSU) per ha). Organic farming accounts for 2.5% of agricultural land. Environmental pressures from the agricultural sector have reduced slowly over the last years, but they remain high compared to other Member States due to the high number of intensive livestock farms and horticultural holdings. Chemical herbicides are used more frequently than in other Member States and nitrogen emissions are also much higher. However, the quantity of nitrogen used per utilised agriculture area (UAA) decreased between 1986 and 2004 by 32%. The use of chemical herbicides also decreased by 50% between 1985 and 2000 but this decrease has since flattened out. In addition, estimates of phosphate and nitrate emissions from the agricultural sector have decreased considerably since the beginning of the 1980s and ammonia emissions have almost halved. The Dutch RDP makes an explicit reference to water issues when discussing environmental problems: nature areas are drying out due to extraction of drinking water and the drainage of agricultural land; high use of chemical herbicides; and emissions from phosphorus, nitrate and ammonia (despite the declining trend) are causing water quality problems. A risk of further intensification has not been identified. There is no direct indication that LEADER is foreseen to implement the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Share of public budget among the three axes The Dutch RDP allocates ashare of 32%) of the overall public expenditure budget to measures under the first axis. Axis 2 receives 47% of the total public budget and axis 3 receives 14% of the total public budget, the remaining 6% are allocated to axis 4. Around 58% of the public budget foreseen for Axis II measures (corresponding to 28% of the total public budget) is allocated to agri-environmental payments (214), with the aim of having a positive impact on water quality issues. The budget foreseen for modernization of agricultural holdings and infrastructure related to the development of agriculture and forestry is considerably smaller. Modernization of agricultural holdings (measure 121) is allocated 37% of the Axis I public budget (corresponding to 12% of the total public budget). Infrastructure related to the development of agriculture and forestry (measure 125) is allocated 45% of the Axis I public budget (corresponding to 14% of the total public budget). Monitoring, control and review The Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) is used to control the impacts of the programme. For all measures, quantitative targets have been identified where possible. Controls will be based on accounting data and physical on-the-spot checks. Impact indicators are designed to go beyond direct effects on beneficiaries. Indicators aimed at environmental pressure on the water system are both manure deposition / ha and water quality indicators. Main strengths and weakness of the RD program as regards to water The main strengths and weaknesses can be summarized as follows: - The Dutch RDP dedicates an equally high share of the overall public expenditures to measures under the first, second and third axis. - 28% of the total public budget is foreseen for agri-environmental measures with the aim of having a positive impact on water quality issues. Agri-environmental measures aim to stimulate agrarian nature management and several packages are likely to improve water quality. Water quality and quantity management is also addressed by support for non-productive investments. - Measures not included under Axis II with a direct link to water include investment support for agricultural holdings, training and information actions, land consolidation plans and protection of rural heritage. - General links are made to the WFD. In the RDP there is an integrated approach to increase innovation, improve the structure of rural areas and reduce environmental impacts and thereby comply with the WFD. Conclusions and options for further improvements of the RD as regards to water Water is clearly an important concern in the Netherlands, with the need to promote and support optimum land and water management practices and ensure sustainable farming stated in the RDP. Agri-environmental measures are the key tool to positively reducing water quality problems. Although the environmental pressures have reduced since the 1990s, livestock density and the use of agrochemicals still remain above the EU average. Therefore, RDP measures and actions within the WFD will need to be integrated to develop synergies to further reduce the impact of agriculture on the environment. PolandGeneral overview of the situation in Rural Areas in the MS In Poland arable land occupies 71% of utilized agricultural area (UAA), whereas permanent grassland occupies 29%. Organic farming is carried out on 1% of the UAA and irrigated agriculture is nearly 3% of the UAA. The main aim of the Polish Rural Development Programme is to implement the concept of multi-functionality of agriculture and rural areas. This assumes enhancing the economic position of agricultural households and increasing the competitiveness of the agri-food sector while providing appropriate measures to increase the diversification of activities in rural areas and create off-farm job opportunities. There is an upward trend in modernization and intensification of agriculture in Poland, with yields increasing steadily (but not spectacularly) since 2000. Improvements in yields and productivity occur in both the arable and livestock sectors. These trends impact farmland bird populations and landscapes – but no particular problem regions are specified. Environmental pressures related to water include eutrophication of water due to excessive amounts of phosphorous and nitrogen from agriculture. In certain areas there are soil pollution problems from high heavy metal concentrations – which could leach to ground waters. These environmental pressures on water are exacerbated by insufficient knowledge regarding optimal farming practices. Many farms have inadequate equipment to ensure environmental protection. There is also a tendency to waste water used in agriculture.
Just over 40% of the total public budget is allocated to Axis I, around 32% of the total public budget is foreseen for measures under Axis II, and the remainder is allocated to Axis III (20%). 13% of the total public budget will be dedicated to agri-environmental measures (AEMs) under Axis II, which are likely to reduce agricultural pressures on water and will help to deal with water problems. One measure under Axis II (“protection of environment including soils and water”) explicitly focuses on water issues. Approximately 10% of the total public budget will be dedicated to the measure 121 “Modernisation of agricultural holdings” under Axis I. This measure gives (among others) financial aid to investments aiming at improvement of the competitiveness of agricultural holdings through modernisation of the technical production infrastructure, adjustment of the production profile to the scale and quality of market needs, improvement in food safety, improvement in animal welfare, environmental protection and work safety. Aid is granted for improving a holding as far as environmental protection is concerned. This encompasses for example support for building manure storage places. Monitoring, control and review The Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) is used to control the impacts of the programme. For all measures, quantitative targets have been identified where possible. Controls will be based on accounting data and physical on the spot checks. Main strengths and weaknesses of the RD program as regards to water In the RDP there is a comprehensive review of water issues in Poland. There is a good overview of the main problems and urgent issues that need to be done. Some linkages between agriculture and water issues are established. Nevertheless, it seems that more detailed reference to water issues could be made when describing RD measures. Some linkages between given measures and water issues are not always straightforward. Support is also given for increasing the gross value added of the holding through introducing innovative production technologies, changing the production scale, improving the production quality or increasing the value added of a product. While increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural sector in Poland is desirable and needed, this type of support runs the risk of promoting agricultural intensification, which may result in additional pressure on the environment and thus on water. Nevertheless, when support is made conditional on good environmental practices, it has the potential to improve environmental protection and at the same time increase the competitiveness of the agricultural sector (e.g. by using modern equipment that applies fertiliser much more effectively so that productivity increases while less fertiliser is used). The training of farmers to improve water management techniques, which includes techniques to reduce diffuse water pollution, is a strategic measure to enhance the effectiveness of modernization and infrastructure development measures. Measures to protect natural resources and adapt farm methods to enhance resource protection and infrastructure developments (e.g. recycle water, harvest rainwater and treat water) will ensure the better protection of resources and at the same time improve the water supply for agriculture. Lastly, there is a good balance in the RD programme, with water issues is found in all three Axes.
The Polish RD programme provides support to the improvement of the competitiveness of agricultural holdings through modernization, but at the same ensures that good environmental practices are adhered to. Infrastructure developments to improve existing irrigation and drainage networks may result in agricultural intensification (more water, more fertiliser and more energy use) and therefore added environmental pressures. In addition, the extraction of water from surface and groundwater, as well as using public water supplies, can exacerbate water shortages. Future development should therefore be carefully monitored and in case an intensification is tracked a revision of the RDP should take this into account, increasing the budgets for environmental protection measures. Directory: workspace -> SpacesStore workspace -> Curriculum vitae richard anderson SpacesStore -> Polish position regarding the 7th Framework Programme of the eu executive Summary workspace -> Full list ic/hep thesis =paper copy of thesis not available workspace -> Executive Summary Introduction workspace -> Review of trends and the challenges of monitoring progress workspace -> Rda and marc 21: a discussion Paper Download 257.38 Kb. Share with your friends:
|