Annex 3 Summary of ms assessments
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Download 257.38 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Latvia
Grand Duchy of LuxembourgGeneral overview of the situation in Rural Areas in the MS In Luxembourg the production of dairy products and beef account for more than half of agricultural production (32% and 22.5% respectively). This is also reflected in the share between arable and pasture land, with more than half of the agricultural land (1287 km²) being used as pastures. A further 20% is comprised of viticulture and grain production (11% and 8% respectively). Organic farming is low at 2.4% of agricultural land. 98% of the agricultural area is categorised as least favoured areas (LFA) (1393.85 km²). The principle problem concerning water related pressures and impacts is the level of nitrates, phosphates and pesticides found in water bodies. Nitrate values have decreased since 2001, whereas phosphorous values have increased in the same time period. Pesticide (>0,1 µg) concentrations are of some concern in surface waters where agricultural activity is high. Concerning groundwater nitrate values, 8% of controls found values exceeding 50mg/l. A significant amount of controls found medium to high levels of nitrate in the ground water (values varying from 10mg/l - < 50 mg/l). Concerning the Water Framework Directive (WFD) risk analysis, 33% of the national water bodies are in danger of failing the WFD environmental targets. Half of these waters are “at risk” due to agricultural pressures: 60% of nitrates and 70% of the phosphate loads in the national freshwaters result from diffuse agricultural pollution. In water protection zones, agricultural activity is curtailed to ensure drinking water quality standards. In terms of water quantity, water abstraction, such as for hose pipe usage, can have an impact in the case of extreme dry periods but is not considered as a general threat. However, nutrient leaching into water bodies is considered as high enough to reach critical values in dry seasons when water can be slightly less abundant. This can lead to higher risks of eutrophication and oxygen depletion. LEADER is not intended specifically to focus on water or quantity issues.
Out of the total 368,457,902 € public budget, approximately one third is directed to Axis I (127,715,800 €), with more than half of the budget to spend on Axis II (212,014,500 €). Axis III covers approximately 4 % of the rural RDP budget. Monitoring, control and review Luxembourg uses the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF). For the individual measures, output related targets are set for certain indicators and are defined by what the targeted volume for investments is. Impact related indicators for measures are also set, which monitor whether goals set in the planning period have been met by a measure. The values are gathered either by questionnaires by the authority in charge of the measure or other qualified personnel on a more regional basis. Main Strengths and weakness of the RD program as regards to water The main strength of the Luxembourg RDP is that surface and ground water quality problems are considered, so WFD implementation is indirectly referenced. However, this strength is accompanied by a number of weaknesses. Water quantity issues are mentioned; however, no measures targeting water quantity issues have been set. Water quality is an issue in terms of nutrient loads and phyto-pharmaceuticals in the aquatic environment and is addressed by several measures. The measures focus on reducing pesticides in vineyard protection, low life stock density farming [livestock units (LSU) <1,4], extensification of agricultural production and environmentally friendly farming. A distinction is made between measures available to all Luxembourg farmers and measures implemented in clearly-defined areas, so the largest share of production types in Luxembourg are covered. The focus is on NATURA 2000 and drinking water protection zones; further indemnity payments are eligible for reduced fertilisation. The distribution of payments is calculated on the basis of priorities (type of cultivation, protection status of the landscape and farming practices). Under Measure 121 on the modernization on farms there is no specific reference to water and the focus is on energy savings and renewable energies. Under Measure 121 on infrastructure related to the development and adaptation of agriculture and forestry there is a clear focus on forestry.
Water quality is the main problem in Luxembourg and the measures mainly provided under axis 2 can be considered as sufficient in terms of targeting the issue and budget provided within the RDP. However, a revision of the RDP could strengthen the importance of water in measure 121 addressing the modernisation of farming and new machinery, e.g. improved fertilization should be considered more. LatviaGeneral overview of the situation in Rural Areas in the MS In Latvia arable farming makes up 73% of agricultural land, whereas pastures make up 17% of agricultural land. Even though in the last few years the average farm size has increased (2003 - 10.4 ha, 2005 – 11.4 ha), the sector is still dominated by small semi-subsistence farms, which make up 2/3 of the farms ≤5 ha. These small semi subsistence farms only produce about 45 % of agricultural products. In 2004, the animal breeding sector made up 49 % of total agricultural production and is dominated by milk and meat production; crop production is regarded as a supplement to production. However, compared to the EU average production intensity remains low. The low intensive nature of agricultural activities in the Latvian countryside has a favourable impact on the biodiversity. However, as a result of a gradual transition to more intensive agricultural methods, agriculture has been identified as a significant, but not the only, source of water pollution by nitrates. Agriculture may therefore endanger the quality of inland and Riga Gulf waters in the future. On the other hand, there are also large abandoned areas of agricultural land, which are not maintained and overgrown with shrubs and weeds. This has been identified an important threat to soil fertility, increases biodiversity loss (bird species) and degrades biologically valuable grasslands. Organic farming continues to grow and represents around 8% of the agricultural land. In Latvia, less favoured area make up 74.4% of the total state territory. In these areas, requirements related to pesticide and fertiliser use and the number of livestock units allowed per hectare are much stricter than in other areas, and farmers are compensated for the additional expenses they face to encourage environmental friendly production methods. This is of course beneficial to reaching good water quality. In addition, there are a considerable number of measures that aim to improve forest management and increase afforestation. Given the important role of forests in water protection, prevention of erosion, and flooding, this strengthens the RDP as regards to water management. Share of public budget among the three axes Almost half of to the public expenditure budget will be devoted to measures under Axis I and around one quarter will be spent on Axis II. Within Axis I a lot of emphasis is on the modernisation of agricultural holdings: 49% of the Axis I budget (corresponding to 23% of the overall RDP) will be dedicated to the modernisation of agricultural holdings. The measure supports investments related to environmental protection, which promotes realisation of the objectives set by the Nitrates Directive and the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The measure will aim to mitigate the environmental impact of agricultural businesses, e.g. by modernising manure collection systems, by supporting the purchase of high quality and accurate mineral fertiliser and plant protection chemical application equipment. Agri-environmental payments form the most important group of measures under Axis II. 44% of the budget foreseen for Axis II (corresponding to 12% of the overall RDP) will be devoted to agri-environmental payments, which aim to positively impact water quality issues. Measures with a particular relevance to water quality issues are: development of organic farming; introduction and promotion of integrated horticulture; maintenance of biodiversity in grasslands; and stubble field in winter period.
The Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) is used to control the impacts of the programme. For each measure there are clearly pre-defined targets and quantified output indicators, which are used to check the success of agri-environmental measures (AEMs). For Axis II measures, the impact on water quality is measured for nutrients and pesticides. 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 There are measures in both Axis I and Axis II that aim to improve environmental protection. The emphasis remains more on improving the competitiveness of agricultural and forestry (Axis I) rather than improving the environment and rural landscape (Axis II). Almost half of to the public expenditure budget will be devoted to measures under Axis I and around one quarter will be spent on Axis II. Water is clearly an important issue in Latvia, but the WFD is not always referred to in important measures such as AEMs. The modernisation of agricultural holdings is allocated 49% of the Axis I budget – it includes support for investments which will increase environmental protection (modernising manure collection systems, equipment to apply mineral fertilisers and plant protection chemicals optimally and accurately). However, these investments also bear the risk of future intensification. Agri-environmental payments form the most important group of measures under Axis II. 44% of the budget foreseen for Axis II (corresponding to 12% of the overall RDP) will be devoted to agri-environmental payments, which aims to have a positive impact on water quality issues. Measures with a particular relevance to water quality issues are: development of organic farming; introduction and promotion of integrated horticulture; maintenance of biodiversity in grasslands; and stubble field in winter period. The budget under Axis III supports the following activities: raising environmental consciousness; investments in the conservation, restoration and renewal of natural heritage; development of valuable natural objects; and for studies and investments related to cultural heritage (measure code 322 Village renewal and development). However, it remains unclear if wastewater treatment is covered by the measure. Conclusions and options for further improvements of the RD as regards to water Water is an important issue in Latvia, with the agriculture sector contributing to poor water quality in inland and coastal waters. Two processes are obviously occurring in the agriculture sector of Latvia: in some areas there is a transition phase of modernisation and intensification, whereas in other areas there is land abandonment. Both processes are detrimental (in different ways) to the environment and the maintenance of good quality water. There is an opportunity, therefore, to promote modern sustainable farming that will not increase environmental pressures and at the same time stop the trend in land abandonment. However, the modernisation of the agricultural sector should be carefully monitored with regard to negative environmental impacts. If a decrease in environmental quality is tracked, a revision of the RDP should strengthen measures falling under Axis II.
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:
|