„Less Favoured Areas in Poland after one year of the implementation” Conference „One Year of EU 25 – Nature Conservation Policy Experience Regarding the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The role of agriculture and agri-environment funding in maintaining regional biodiversity Expert-Workshop Gabala, Azerbaijan, 5-6 July 2010 Dipl.-Biologin.
Advertisements

Rural Development Policy
Axis 2: Environment/land management DG AGRI, October 2005 Rural Development
1 PROGRAMMING TRANSITION From SAPARD to RDPs and SPDs/OPs.
M I N I S T R Y O F A G R I C U L T U R E, F O O D A N D C O N S U M E R A F F A I R S Focusing on objectives – simplifying delivery Rural Development,
Zuzana Sarvasova National Forest Centre Zvolen
Position of biodiversity in future CAP Nina Dobrzyńska Department for Direct Payments Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Poland Ryn, 29th September.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the Rural Development Polish perspective Dr Dariusz Nieć International Conference „Future.
RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN BULGARIA Nedka Ivanova UNWE, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Agriculture and Environment Future of European Rural Development. Cracow, 30 November – 1 December 2005 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Department of Rural Development LEADER+ TYPE MEASURE IN POLAND International Conference: „Future of European.
Małgorzata Siuta, CEEweb for Biodiversity and Olivia Lewis Natura 2000: Benefits and Opportunities for Farmers.
Ingo Heinz University of Dortmund, Germany Nature and Economy: An Application to the Rural Countryside Wageningen, 31 May – 2 June 2007 Workshop The EU.
Potentials for Organic Farming Enviromental friendly agriculture and Efficient Sustainable Small-Scale Wastewater Systems Maria Staniszewska and Gunnar.
Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. DAVID SMALL DIRECTOR OF FOOD, FARMING AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY.
Highlight some of the main ways in which the EU has tried to incorporate environmental objectives and concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy Environmental.
MUNICIPAL REVENUE IN TURKEY: STRUCTURE AND RECENT CHANGES PROFESSOR AYŞE GÜNER JUNE 16, 2009.
Romanian Rural Area – General Informations 87% from total area is delimited as rural area 45% of the total population (9.7 million inhabitants) are living.
Nic Lampkin Institute of Rural Sciences
Rural Development policy
1 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FOOD Rural Development Policy
PART I - RURAL DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS Chapter II - NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES Paul Fensom Department for Environment, Food and.
Common Agricultural Policy - FoEE FoEE meeting Monor May 2009 o Europe is a big player o CAP is at the heart of EU food system o What is FoEE going to.
Technical meeting for LFA in Bulgaria MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY National Program for Rural Development in Bulgaria Bonn, Germany.
European Commission Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development EU rural development policy.
Antonis Constantinou Director, Rural Development Programmes II DG Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission DEVELOPING A VISION ON THE FUTURE.
Why can voluntary agreements between water companies, farmers and authorities help to implement the European WFD and CAP reforms? Ingo Heinz University.
Rural Development Plan for England (RDPE) – improving the environment through agri-environment Rosie Simpson, Natural England.
Perspectives of Rural Development Programmes in Poland Nina Dobrzyńska Perspectives of Rural Development Programmes in Poland Nina Dobrzyńska The Ministry.
European Commission - Directorate General for Agriculture 1 EU rural development policy Nikiforos SIVENAS European Commission Directorate General.
Natura EU ambitions for a coherent ecological network State of Play and Challenges Saskia Richartz Institute for European Environmental Policy.
Ministry For Rural Affairs and the Environment Investments in Agricultural Holdings & Improvements in Processing and Marketing Measures in Malta Rural.
Enver AKSOY, MSc Head of Strategy Development Board of MoFAL Policy approaches of Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock to pasture management in.
Land improvement and preparations for programming period Marko Gorban 17 May 2012.
1 Different instruments of the RDP as good tools for combining and complementing aims of nature conservation and sustainable agriculture Andrej.
Wageningen International Introduction agri environment measures Pleven Agri environment in the Netherlands Background Natura 2000 and agricultere Common.
I. Introduction As many case studies have shown, co-operative agreements (CA) can be more effective than other instruments, such as compulsory rules and.
“One year of EU 25 – Nature Conservation policy experience regarding the 2nd pillar of the CAP and reform prospects” The main points of the new EAFRD Regulation.
„Forestry support and early retirement in Poland after one year of the implementation” Conference „One Year of EU 25 – Nature Conservation Policy Experience.
Your Agriculture. What is the challenge? What can policy do? What can you do?
Ministry of the Environment, Conservation, Agriculture and Consumer Protection of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia Agri-environmental Measures in North.
Dorota Metera IUCN Programme Office for Central Europe Rural Development Policy in the EU10 One Year of EU 25 – Nature Conservation Policy Experience Regarding.
Public money for Public goods A new CAP for Europe’s biodiversity Ariel Brunner EU Agriculture Policy Officer European Division, BirdLife International.
Rural Development The Second Pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy Dr. Rolf Moehler.
“Nature Conservation and the EU Policy for Sustainable Land Management in the New EU Member States” Kilian Delbrück, BMU, Bonn Summary.
Needs on input use Guido Castellano, DG AGRI L2, Economic Analysis of EU Agriculture FSS working party meeting February 2010, Luxembourg.
Andrea Valigurova Radoslava Mitkova Monika Bialkowska.
Maintaining Semi-natural Grasslands in Slovakia Miroslava Plassmann Brussels, 15th March 2012.
EU RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY Half of the population of the 25 EU member states live in rural areas Therefore rural development is a very important policy.
TAIEX Workshop on Agricultural Advisory Services in the EU Kiev, Ukraine February 2016 Peculiarities of legal regulation of the advisory service.
Will the reformed CAP respond to the challenge of sustainable development of natural resources and climate change? Copenhagen, 2 March 2012 Nina Dobrzyńska,
Agricultural Policy and Grasslands Jaak Herodes Estonian Farmers Federation.
Adaptation to climate change in the Common Agricultural Policy
CAP and National funding for grasslands
Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development
Rural Development Policy in the EU15 An overview of measures taken to date under EU Regulation 1257/99 on Rural Development Euronatur – 5/9/
Directore General for Agriculture and Rural Development
EU Enlargement and Agriculture: Risks and Opportunities Martin Konečný Friends of the Earth Europe
European Commission – DG ENV
Title: EastAgri Workshop
Sergiu Didicescu, Unit H1 DG Agriculture and Rural Development
Most prominent environmental issues/concerns arising from farming:
The Common Agricultural Policy and the Water Framework Directive
Meeting of the Water Directors - Athens, 17/18 June 2003
Rural development support for implementing the Water Framework Directive Expert Group on WFD and Agriculture Seville, 6-7 April 2010.
The CAP post-2013: statistical needs in the field of rural development
Strategic Steering Group on Agriculture & Water Framework Directive
Position of the European Farmers on the changes and news within the new CAP François GUERIN | Second National Farmers meeting in Bulgaria 6 February.
WFD and agriculture Putting policy linkages into practice
Point 6 - CAP reform elements for discussion
Presentation transcript:

„Less Favoured Areas in Poland after one year of the implementation” Conference „One Year of EU 25 – Nature Conservation Policy Experience Regarding the 2nd Pillar of the CAP and Reform Prospects” Bonn, September 5, 2005 r. Bożenna Wójcik Institute for Sustainable Development Warsaw, Poland

The LFA measure in RDP for for Poland (1) RDP Priority B “Sustainable and multifunctional development with special regards to environmental issues”: Support for LFA Agri-environmental schemes and animal welfare Afforestation Meeting EU standards

The LFA measure in RDP for for Poland (2) Financial support for within the RDP for : All public expenditure million Euro: - EU contribution from EAGGF million Euro - Polish budget contribution million Euro for million Euro for million Euro for million Euro Allocation for LFA that is: 27.2 % of total RDP allocation – the biggest measure budget in the RDP 36.0 % of allocation for 7 main measures of the Plan 58.5 % of allocation for Priority B “Sustainable and multifunctional development with special regards to environmental issues”

The objectives of the LFA implementation in Poland ensuring continuation of agricultural land use and thereby contributing to the maintenance of a viable rural community; maintaining countryside; promoting sustainable farming systems.

The areas of the LFA implementation (1) mountain areas (accord. to art. 18) – gminas (communes) where over half of farmland is situated above 500 m a. s. l. lowland areas (accord. to art. 19) gminas where agricultural productivity is limited due to low soil quality, unfavourable climate, water and land relief conditions as well as demographic indicators and the share of population engaged in agriculture - lowland zone I - lowland zone II – more limitations areas affected by specific natural handicaps (accord. to art.20) - gminas or municipal districts located in upland areas (those which in Polish tax system are covered by agricultural tax reductions because of natural handicaps)

The areas of the LFA implementation (2) area with 54,2 % of the country agricultural land – ca. 7,8 mln ha of agricultural land but 53,5 % of country agricultural land entitled to LFA support (farms more then 1 ha) this are areas with: - a large share of abandoned land (fallow and idle land) and - several times higher share of population working in agriculture than that in non-LFA areas

The areas of the LFA implementation (3)

Conditions: The farm or a part of the farm is localised in LFA Minimal area used for agricultural activity not smaller then 1 ha The farmer is obliged to apply the conditions of the Usual Good Farming Practice The farmer is obligate to continue farming practices on plots situated within the LFA for 5 years from the date of the first payment The farmer is obligate to limit the use of hormones, thyreostatic and beta-agonistic substances in animal feeding

Usual Good Farming Practice based on Polish binding legal acts The UGFP refer to: use of fertilizers and their storage agricultural use of waste water agriculture use of municipal sewage sludge use of pesticides and their storage grassland management order and cleanliness in the farm protection of wildlife habitats soil protection water management

Control 5% of farms is controlled each year as usual by all Single Area Payments First control: – problem recognised – warning Next control: – the some problem – no payment in current year – new problem – 7% reduction of payment

Amount of Support Mountain areas 68 Euro/ha Lowland areas – zone I 38 Euro/ha – zone II 56 Euro/ha Areas with specific handicaps56 Euro/ha

Limitations for support Degressivity of support depends from farms largeness: 1-50 ha – 100 % of payments for each ha ha – 50 % ha – 25% over 300 ha – no support

State of the implementation Applications submitted: in year in year 2005 The area ca. 6,5 million ha in 2004 ca. 7,0 million ha in 2005

Problems (1) Not all high nature value farmlands covered by LFA and Agri-Environmental Programmes – some Natura 2000 sites out of payments possibilities as a result of the designation by different institutions – no possibility to pay the farmers for activities positive for nature protection.

Problems (2) Some environmental effects can be expected because of the intensification of agricultural practises – new money this is possibility to by more pesticides & fertilisers and some new machines – this can make bigger pressure on environment.

Problems (3) Conflict with afforestation for some farmers as a result of lack of early information about full set of instruments on time: promotion and implementation of LFA measure started since April 2004 with single farm payments – farmers who applied can not apply later for afforestation (promoted and introduced only since January 2005), because they are obliged to continue farming practices even on the very poor soils.

Problems (4) Difficult and not giving satisfaction instrument for small farms: – „to small money” and „to many problems with fulfilling the conditions” for small farmers (lot of them are old or have very lot education level) result that not all apply for this support; – to small to take this instrument as a serious support of continuing the farming practices or to invest in manure storage, they will be not able to use money of other instruments (SOP); – definitely too small to continue the farming practices in the mountains in conjunction with average small size of farms.

Problems (5) But this instrument that is „easy money” for big farmers – this can incrise the competition between small and big on the market: simple condition of Usual Good Agriculture Practice deriving from the existing law, easy to fulfil by big farmers, who will use other programs to improve for example manure storage as Sectoral Operational Programme (SOP) low control level – only 5 % of farms.