Annex 3 Summary of ms assessments

Romania

The Romanian agricultural sector is characterized by a dualistic farm structure. The majority of farm holdings are small scale individual farms which are typically cultivating small areas of land (3,37 ha on average). On the other hand, there are large scale farming corporation cultivating 50 hectares or more. The majority of land is cultivated by the owner and land ownership is highly fragmented. Most of the agricultural land is arable (63.9%); pastures make up 22.8%, hayfields 10.2% and vineyards and orchards 2.9%. 34.8% of UAA is classified as least favoured area. Only .8% of total UAA consists of organic farming (2005 data. In the livestock sector, which represents 40% of production, numbers decreased sharply during the first transition years. The dissolution or privatization of former co-operatives and state farms has resulted in significant decrease in livestock numbers. In recent years, though, herds have been fairly stable, and signs of recovery are also present. Animal production tends to increase, but small-size units limit its potential.

The concentration of organic substances and ammonium in the underground waters is recognized as an important environmental problem in Romania. Water quality issues in Romania are for the time being less affected by the use of fertiliser in agriculture than by the poor infrastructure of the sewage system. However, there is trend in specialisation and intensification of livestock production among private operators and this increases the risk of nitrate and phosphate pollution. Furthermore, on the medium and long term, it is estimated that more widespread intensive agricultural practices will reappear following accession. Currently, water quality issues are not put forward as a key environmental pressure due to agriculture. Therefore, it is not surprising that water issues are only addressed to a limited extent and that only few RDP measures explicitly refer to water or the WFD, or make a direct or indirect link with water management issues.

Share of public budget among the three axes

The budget foreseen under axis II “Improving the environment and the countryside” is relatively small: only 23% of the public expenditure budget is dedicated to measures under the 2nd axis. The agri-environmental measures under axis II account for only 10% of the overall public expenditure budget. The Romanian RDP foresees to spend 40% of the total expenditures to axis I measures with the aim of improving the competitiveness of the agriculture and forestry sector. 25% of the budget foreseen for axis I measures (corresponding to 10% of the overall RDP budget) will be dedicated to the modernisation of agricultural holdings (code 121) and 12% of the budget foreseen for axis I measures (corresponding to 5% of the overall RDP budget) will be spent on measures related to infrastructure for the development and adaptation of agriculture (code 125). These measures will raise the competitiveness of farmers but also increase the risk of intensification. However, investments aimed at implementing the nitrate directive are supported under measure 121 ‘modernisation of agricultural holdings’ and these will improve water quality issues. Investments to modernise and restore irrigation equipment and drainage systems are supported under measure 125 ‘infrastructure related to the development of agriculture’ and will have beneficial effects on water management as well. Measure 322 under Axis III, which receives 15.5% of the total budget, also contributes to improving water quality through support for public drinking water and waste water infrastructure projects.

The monitoring and evaluation of the rural development programme is carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF), which establishes a set of common indicators for overall objectives and is supplemented with additional indicators specific to the Programme. The Managing Authority, which is in charge of monitoring, will submit annual progress reports, including quantitative information based on common output and result indicators. WFD implementation is not mentioned in the review process.

The main relevant indicator to check effectiveness of water related measures is “Improvement in water quality: changes in gross nutrient balance”, which looks at the surplus of nutrient per ha (kg/ha) but no indicators is provided that measures the improvements in surface- and groundwater. In this indicator reference to reduction in annual trends in the concentration of pesticides in surface- and groundwater is made. Baseline values and concrete targets are not yet set but will be established once information is available. Additional environmental indicators include ammonia emissions, technologic consumption of fertilizers used in agriculture and surface water quality. No quantitative values are available at this time.

Main strengths and weakness of the RD program as regards to water

The link between the RDP and the WFD is not clearly developed. The Article 5 assessment of the WFD was not taken into account in the SWOT. While achieving objectives of the Water Framework Directive is mentioned as an overarching goal of the RDP, at measure level the WFD is rarely mentioned.

WFD objectives are only expressly mentioned at measure level for Agri- environmental measures (code 214) package 4 and measure 322 on Village Renewal. The agri-environmental measures -Package 4 promotes green cover crops, which helps to reduce nutrient leaching and lowers the risk of soil erosion. Other AEM sub-measures do not mention water management as an objective.

Measure 322 supports, among other activities, setting up, extending and modernising infrastructure for water collection, treatment and supply. Pollution from sewage is the greatest water quality issues in Romania, and the measure focuses more on setting up new connection than on upgrading existing connections. The measure has a high budget and will result in a significant reduction in water pollution from public infrastructure. Measure 123 under Axis I also contributes to improved waste water treatment to increase value of products.

Measure 121 focusing on the modernisation of farms and 125 (Infrastructure related to the development and adaptation of agriculture and forestry) also contribute to water management. Measure 121 includes support for investments that help to implement the Nitrate Directive. Although improvement in nutrient use is supported, the WFD is not specifically mentioned and there are no indicators to assess the impact of the measure in terms of reduced water quality. Measure 125 supports upgrading and rehabilitating existing irrigation systems to increase efficiency. While the measure states that all projects “must have all environmental necessary notices required by the law”, the WFD is not expressly mentioned. Furthermore, there are no water saving indicators, only an indicator on surface area modernized and rehabilitated (ha).

When looking at the budget that is available for the measures above it comes clear that water protection mostly is addressed through Axis III, Measure 322 and to a less extend but through a few measures in Axis I and Measure 214 under Axis II. However a revision of the RDP is possible after the River Basin Management Plan has been finalised to include payments for WFD implementation under Measure 213.

The modernization of the dualistic agricultural sector and the agri-food processing industry is crucial for the economic development of rural areas in Romania and it is therefore justified to devote the majority of budget to measures under axis I “Improving the competitiveness of agriculture and forestry sector”. However, it is crucial to make support conditional on the farmer’s effort to ensure, or go beyond, good environmental practices.

As regards water, agriculture is not currently the principle source of pollution. The use of measure under Axis I and III, which focus on modernising agricultural holdings and improving village infrastructure, address water pollution from public infrastructure, which is greater water quality problem in Romania. 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 ensure strengthen measures falling under axis II.

To further improve the RDP as regards water management, quantitative result indicators are necessary in order to evaluate the impact measures have on improving water quality.