Administrative burdens in EU agriculture: an evidence base CAP Simplification Expert Group 24 April 2007 Jenny McInnes Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, UK

Aims and context of study Collect and interpret data on administrative burdens in the agriculture sector from across the EU; Identify the regulations which impose the most significant burdens for farmers; In support of CAP Simplification, and in line with European Spring Council Conclusions, 2007

Administrative cost data Analysis of data generated by Sweden, The Netherlands, Denmark, Czech Republic, and UK demonstrates some areas of common burden: Single Payment Scheme (cross compliance, set aside) Livestock Identification & Movement Welfare of farmed animals Veterinary Medicines Pesticides Nitrates Pollution Prevention and Control Rural Development

Qualitative information on administrative burdens Surveys in Germany, Finland, Denmark, France and UK support quantitative findings, in terms of most burdensome regulations. To field-test these results with a wider audience, a questionnaire was sent to farming organisations across Europe.

Results of field-testing Over 300 responses from 10 Member States (Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Lithuania, Slovenia, Sweden, and the UK)

Specific issues raised: inspections (LIM, XC, SPS, Nitrates), reading guidance (SPS, XC), keeping records (LIM, XC, Nitrates) Differences according to sector, size and region Other areas of concern: water, plant health and waste regulations ‘New’ vs. ‘old’ regulations: familiarisation burdens Limitations: sample size and breadth Results of field-testing

Conclusions Clear spread of sources of burdens from agriculture, environment and animal health and welfare regulations: we need to join up our approach to reducing administrative burdens to ensure that the impact is felt on the ground.

Conclusions Administrative costs may not accurately reflect the perception of burdens. Simplification programmes need to be developed in consultation with the farming community if impacts are to be felt.

Conclusions Variation in perceptions of administrative burdens Between and within Member States According to farm type and size

Conclusions Administrative burdens targets are a useful political incentive for simplification. Measurement of administrative costs enables governments to monitor reductions in red tape. But it is not sufficient to ensure simplification efforts are felt by stakeholders.

Next Steps Embed simplification in 2008 Health Check of the CAP Responsibility for developing simplification proposals lies with the Member States Other reviews – SPS Study, Cross compliance paper Links to other Commission services and the 25% target Pipeline regulation