Biodiversity/HNV indicators and the CAP Zélie Peppiette Rural Development Evaluation Manager DG AGRI, European Commission UK seminar on HNV farming policy, London,18 th June 2012

CMEF: what does it ask? HNV common impact indicators new for period Baseline indicator = HNV farmland and forestry Common impact indicator = Maintenance of HNV farmland and forestry (recorded as changes in HNV farmland and forestry)

CMEF: what does it ask? FBI common impact indicators new for period Baseline indicator = Population of farmland birds Common impact indicator 5 = Reversing decline in FBI

CMEF: what does it ask? Biodiversity result indicator new for period Area and % UAA under a management contract designed to support biodiversity

Approaches to Baseline HNV assessment 1. Extent Photo: Liri Selge

Summary of approaches: method IRENA/EAA 3 Land cover 13 Designation 12 Species data/habitat10 Sampling 1 Systems 7 IACS 5 Management schemes 4

Summary of approaches: outcome Type 1 only4 Type 2 only1 Type 3 only1 Types 1 & 25 Types 1 & 36 Types 1,2 & 37

Approaches to Baseline HNV assessment 2. Quality

Summary of approaches: Quality Very few MS currently assess quality Some databases exist, but not updated regularly Sampling approach can provide quality assessment

Summary of MTE findings Photo Arne Ader

MTE findings: Biodiversity Info in MTE reports mostly based on: Output/result indicators Area in specific schemes Expert/stakeholder opinions Qualitative judgements Not interpretations of the impact indicators

MTE findings: FBI Majority of MTEs did not cover FBI 20 MTEs calculate trend (not net) Some found –ve trend, but not due to RDP Not always appropriate Lack of data/evidence/causal links

MTE findings: HNV Least well addressed impact indicator 24 quantify 21 on basis of management schemes Not linked to trend in baseline indicator Only 5% « advanced » assessment « Too soon » or Data/methodology issues Development work still ongoing

Where do we go now?

Extension of common M&E concept to Pillar 1 Impact indicators cover both pillars Common indicators to be included in implementing acts compulsory

Proposals for CAP post-2013 M&E: Process so far  Stakeholder meeting Sept 2011  Legal proposals published Oct 2011  1st presentation of indicator proposals March 2012  Revised indicator proposals June 2012

Current indicator proposals 1. impact (+context)

They serve both pillars of the CAP To the maxium extent possible: use of already established data sources such as FADN, FSS, HICP, Economic Accounts for Agriculture… Aggregation at MS level, Member States can use more detailled regionalised data Yearly availability of info (for some indicators less often) Exact definitions and data locations will be published in the indicator fiches

Net GHG emissions from agriculture Farmland bird population index HNV indicator Share of agriculture in water use Irrigated area Water quality Soil quality index Soil erosion indicator

Proposed biodiversity impact indicators Farmland Birds Index AEI 25 Population trend of selected species Pan-European Bird Monitoring Scheme (22 MS) Data assessed by EEA Annual MS level

Proposed biodiversity impact indicators High Nature Value Farmland (Farming) AEI 23 % UAA with HNV status Common concept/definition Multiple methods/data Base option: Updated EEA estimate or UAA in N2K Baseline, during cycle, ex-post RDP level

Current indicator proposals 2. Target/result

Proposed biodiversity target/result indicator Forest or other wooded area under management contracts supporting biodiversity UAA under management contracts supporting biodiversity and/or landscapes One main focus area per operation – quantified target Other relevant FA identified Priority 4: restoring, preserving and enhancing ecosystems dependent on agriculture and forestry Focus area 4A: Restoring and preserving biodiversity including N2K, HNV and landscapes

Open questions Photo: Riho Marja

Open questions Maintain FBI as separate or incorporate as element of HNV? HNV Farmland or Farming? 2 target indicators or 3 for FA 4A? Proposal is that default result for LFA is landscape Should biodiversity and landscape be separated?

Thank you!