Category Archives: Agriculture

The common agricultural policy (CAP) dates back to the early days of European integration, when Member States made a commitment to restructuring and increasing food production, which had been damaged as a result of the Second World War. Today, the CAP still has a pivotal role in the European Union, not just because farmland and forests account for more than 90 % of land within the EU, but also because it has become an essential mechanism for facing new challenges in terms of food quality, environmental protection and trade. The 2003 reform was a key moment in the CAP’s development, adapting the policy to meet the new requirements of farmers, consumers and the planet. This approach continues to form the basis of the future development of the common agricultural policy of an enlarged Union present on the world stage.
General framework
Financing, Rural development, Direct support, Structural operations, Competition, Information and statistics
Markets for agricultural products
Direct support schemes, Common organisation of agricultural markets (CMO), Sectoral applications, Other products
Food
Food quality, Organic farming, Genetically-modified organisms
Environment
Management and conservation of resources, Forest resources and non-food products, Pollution from agriculture
Agriculture: enlargement
Pre-accession, On-going negotiations, 2004 and 2007 enlargements

Water Protection and Management

Leave a reply

Water protection and management

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Water protection and management

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Environment > Water protection and management

Water protection and management

Some 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by seas and oceans, and these produce almost three quarters of the oxygen we breathe. We can use directly only 1% of this water, however, and many forms of human activity put water resources under considerable pressure. Polluted water, whatever the source of the pollution, flows one way or another back into our natural surroundings – into the sea or water tables – from where it can have a harmful effect on human health and the environment. One of the most important pieces of legislation in this area is the Water Framework Directive.

GENERAL FRAMEWORK

  • Water protection and management (Water Framework Directive)
  • Pricing and long-term management of water
  • Flood management and evaluation
  • Droughts and water scarcity
  • Urban waste water treatment

SPECIFIC USES OF WATER

  • Quality of drinking water
  • Bathing water quality (until 2014)
  • Bathing water quality
  • Water suitable for fish-breeding
  • Quality of shellfish waters

MARINE POLLUTION

  • Strategy for the marine environment
  • Maritime safety: compensation fund for oil pollution damage
  • Maritime safety: prevention of pollution from ships
  • Ship-source pollution and criminal penalties
  • Maritime safety: prohibition of organotin compounds on ships
  • Maritime safety: Bunkers Convention

REGIONAL WATERS

  • European Union Strategy for Danube Region
  • Baltic Sea Strategy
  • Environment strategy for the Mediterranean
  • Strategy to improve maritime governance in the Mediterranean
  • Black Sea Synergy
  • Danube – Black Sea region

Regional convention

  • Barcelona Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean
  • Helsinki Convention on the protection of the Baltic Sea
  • Helsinki Convention: trans-boundary watercourses and international lakes
  • Convention for the Protection of the Rhine
  • OSPAR Convention

DISCHARGES OF SUBSTANCES

  • Industrial emissions
  • Integrated pollution prevention and control (until 2013)
  • Environmental quality standards applicable to surface water
  • Protection of groundwater against pollution
  • Detergents
  • Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants (POPs)
  • Agricultural nitrates
  • Community strategy concerning mercury
  • Protection of the aquatic environment against discharges of dangerous substances (until 2013)
  • Other substances: protection of groundwater

 

 

Another Normative about Water protection and management

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic

Agriculture > Environment

Water protection and management (Water Framework Directive)

Document or Iniciative

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy [See amending acts].

Summary

The European Union (EC) has established a framework for the protection of:

  • inland surface waters *;
  • groundwater *;
  • transitional waters *; and
  • and coastal waters *.

This Framework-Directive has a number of objectives, such as preventing and reducing pollution, promoting sustainable water usage, environmental protection, improving aquatic ecosystems and mitigating the effects of floods and droughts.

Its ultimate objective is to achieve “good ecological and chemical status” for all Community waters by 2015.

Administrative arrangements

Member States have to identify all the river basins * lying within their national territory and to assign them to individual river basin districts *. River basins covering the territory of more than one Member State will be assigned to an international river basin district.

Member States are to designate a competent authority for the application of the rules provided for in this Framework-Directive within each river basin district.

Identification and analysis of waters

By 2004 at the latest, each Member State shall produce:

  • an analysis of the characteristics of each river basin district;
  • a review of the impact of human activity on water;
  • an economic analysis of water use;
  • a register of areas requiring special protection;
  • a survey of all bodies of water used for abstracting water for human consumption and producing more than 10 m³ per day or serving more than 50 persons.

This analysis must be revised in 2013 and every six years thereafter.

Management plans and programmes of measures

In 2009, nine years after the Framework-Directive entered into force, management plans were produced for each river basin district, taking account of the results of the analyses and studies carried out. These plans cover the period 2009-2015. They shall be revised in 2015 and then every six years thereafter.

The management plans must be implemented in 2012. They aim to:

  • prevent deterioration, enhance and restore bodies of surface water, achieve good chemical and ecological status of such water by 2015 at the latest and to reduce pollution from discharges and emissions of hazardous substances;
  • protect, enhance and restore the status of all bodies of groundwater, prevent the pollution and deterioration of groundwater, and ensure a balance between groundwater abstraction and replenishment;
  • preserve protected areas.

The management plans for river basin districts can be complemented by more detailed management programmes and plans for a sub-basin, a sector or a particular type of water.

Temporary deterioration of bodies of water is not in breach of the requirements of this Framework-Directive if it is the result of circumstances which are exceptional or could not reasonably have been foreseen and which are due to an accident, natural causes or force majeure.

Member States shall encourage participation by all stakeholders in the implementation of this Framework-Directive, specifically with regard to the management plans for river basin districts. Projects from the management plans must be submitted to public consultation for at least 6 months.

From 2010, Member States must ensure that water pricing policies provide adequate incentives for users to use water resources efficiently and that the various economic sectors contribute to the recovery of the costs of water services, including those relating to the environment and resources.

Member States must introduce arrangements to ensure that effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties are imposed in the event of breaches of the provisions of this Framework Directive.

A list of priority substances selected from among the ones which present a significant risk to the aquatic environment has been drawn up at European level. This list is set out in Annex X to this Framework-Directive.

Key terms used in the act
  • Inland waters: all standing or flowing water on the surface of the land, and all groundwater on the landward side of the baseline from which the breadth of territorial waters is measured.
  • Surface water: inland waters, except groundwater, transitional waters and coastal waters, except in respect of chemical status, for which territorial waters are also included.
  • Groundwater: all water which is below the surface of the ground in the saturation zone and in direct contact with the ground or subsoil.
  • Transitional waters: bodies of surface water in the vicinity of river mouths which are partly saline in character as a result of their proximity to coastal waters but which are substantially influenced by freshwater flows.
  • Coastal water: surface water on the landward side of a line every point of which is at a distance of one nautical mile on the seaward side from the nearest point of the baseline from which the breadth of territorial waters is measured, extending where appropriate up to the outer limit of transitional waters.
  • River basin: the area of land from which all surface run-off flows through a sequence of streams, rivers and, possibly, lakes into the sea at a single river mouth, estuary or delta.
  • River basin district: the area of land and sea, made up of one or more neighbouring river basins together with their associated groundwaters and coastal waters, which is identified under Article 3(1) as the main unit for management of river basins.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2000/60/EC

22.12.2000

22.12.2003

OJ L 327 of 22.12.2000
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Decision 2455/2001/EC

16.12.2001

–

OJ L 331 of 15.12.2001

Directive 2008/32/EC

21.3.2008

–

OJ L 81 of 20.3.2008

Directive 2009/31/EC

25.6.2009

–

OJ L 140 of 5.6.2009

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 2000/60/EC have been incorporated in the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

AMENDMENT OF ANNEXES

Annex X – List of priority substances in the field of water policy

Directive 2008/105/EC [Official Journal L 348 of 24.12.2008].

Related Acts

Communication from the Commission of 22 March 2007 – Towards sustainable water management in the European Union – First stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC [COM(2007) 128 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

In this report the Commission sets out the results provided by the Member States concerning the application of the Water Framework Directive. Among other things, it mentions that there is a considerable risk that several Member States will fail to meet the targets set in the Framework Directive, in particular because of the physical deterioration of aquatic ecosystems, especially as a result of overexploitation of water resources and disturbing levels of pollution from diffuse sources. The Commission also indicates that there have been problems with meeting the deadline for incorporating the Framework Directive into national law and shortcomings in the actual transposition process in some cases. However, the establishment of river basin districts and the designation of the competent national authorities seem to be well under way, although progress does still need to be made with regard to international cooperation in some instances. The Commission also indicates that there are considerable differences in the quality of the environmental and economic assessments made in respect of river basins as well as shortcomings in the economic analyses carried out. The Commission finishes by making a number of recommendations to the Member States with a view to making good the shortcomings reported, integrating sustainable management of water into other national policies and making the most of public participation, and gives advance notice of what it plans to do in future in the context of European water management policy.

Report from the Commission of 1 April 2009 published in accordance with article 18.3 of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC on programmes for monitoring of water status [COM(2009) 156 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Water Protection and Management in other Legal Encyclopedias

Klamath Basin Water Supply Enhancement Act of 2000 – American Legal Encyclopedia

Coastal Zone Management Act Of 1972 in the American Legal Encyclopedia

Agriculture

Leave a reply

Agriculture

Agriculture Contents

  • General framework: Financing, Rural development, Direct support, Structural operations, Competition, Information and statistics
  • Markets for agricultural products: Direct support schemes, Common organisation of agricultural markets (CMO), Sectoral applications, Other products
  • Food:  Food quality, Organic farming, Genetically-modified organisms
  • Environment: Management and conservation of resources, Forest resources and non-food products, Pollution from agriculture
  • Agriculture: enlargement: Pre-accession, On-going negotiations, 2004 and 2007 enlargements

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Agriculture

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture

Agriculture

The common agricultural policy (CAP) dates back to the early days of European integration, when Member States made a commitment to restructuring and increasing food production, which had been damaged as a result of the Second World War. Today, the CAP still has a pivotal role in the European Union, not just because farmland and forests account for more than 90 % of land within the EU, but also because it has become an essential mechanism for facing new challenges in terms of food quality, environmental protection and trade. The 2003 reform was a key moment in the CAP’s development, adapting the policy to meet the new requirements of farmers, consumers and the planet. This approach continues to form the basis of the future development of the common agricultural policy of an enlarged Union present on the world stage.

Agriculture Contents

  • General frameworkFinancing, Rural development, Direct support, Structural operations, Competition, Information and statistics
  • Markets for agricultural productsDirect support schemes, Common organisation of agricultural markets (CMO), Sectoral applications, Other products
  • FoodFood quality, Organic farming, Genetically-modified organisms
  • EnvironmentManagement and conservation of resources, Forest resources and non-food products, Pollution from agriculture
  • Agriculture: enlargementPre-accession, On-going negotiations, 2004 and 2007 enlargements

See also

Overviews of European Union: Agriculture.
Further information: European Commission Agriculture and Rural Development Directorate-General.

Agriculture: enlargement

Leave a reply

Agriculture: enlargement

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Agriculture: enlargement

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > Agriculture: enlargement

Agriculture: enlargement

The recent enlargements of the European Union have had the effect of increasing the significance of agriculture and have resulted in new economic and social challenges for the common agricultural policy (CAP). The new Member States have huge agricultural potential in terms of human resources and providing further farmland. However, this potential has yet to be fully realised. There is a considerable socioeconomic divide between the old and the new Member States in the agricultural sector. Through its intervention, the EU aims to prepare candidate countries for implementing the CAP, specifically by adapting their infrastructure and reducing the disparities between Member States upon their accession.

SYSTEM OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT

  • Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)
  • Pre-accession agricultural instrument (SAPARD)

ONGOING ENLARGEMENT

  • The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Agriculture, fisheries and food safety
  • Croatia – Agriculture, fisheries and food safety
  • Turkey – Agriculture, fisheries and food safety
  • Iceland – Agriculture, fisheries and food safety

JANUARY 2007 ENLARGEMENT

  • Bulgaria
  • Romania

MAY 2004 ENLARGEMENT

  • Cyprus
  • Estonia
  • Hungary
  • Latvia
  • Lithuania
  • Malta
  • Poland
  • The Czech Republic
  • Slovakia
  • Slovenia

Single Farm Payment

Leave a reply

Single Farm Payment

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Single Farm Payment

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Single Farm Payment

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 [See amending act(s)].

Summary

Since the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which took place in June 2003, production-related support has been gradually abolished and included in the Single Payment Scheme (SPS), the system of direct payments which European farmers benefit from. This Regulation continues this reform.

Direct payments are support granted to farmers directly under the framework of one of the support schemes listed in Annex I to the Regulation. Some of this support is still directly linked to production; however the majority of direct support is decoupled and granted under the auspices of an income support scheme called the “Single Payment Scheme” (SPS). Under the SPS, support granted to farmers is not linked to production.

The objective of this Regulation is to gradually integrate support coupled with production into the single payment scheme.

DIRECT PAYMENTS

Cross-compliance

Direct support is subject to the principle of ‘cross-compliance’, according to which farmers must comply with a certain number of requirements in order to receive payments. These requirements relate to three areas:

  • public health, animal and plant health;
  • the environment;
  • animal welfare.

If the farmer does not comply with these requirements, they are penalised with a reduction in or cancellation of the direct payments.

Modulation

Modulation is a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments. Direct payments of over EUR 5 000 have therefore been reduced year on year in accordance with a particular percentage of up to 10 % by 2012.

The corresponding amounts are transferred to the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) to enhance rural development programmes, in particular for measures concerning climate change, renewable energies, water management and biodiversity. The modulation system does not apply to either the outermost regions, the Aegean Islands or to Member States subject to “phasing in”.

Farm advisory system

Farmers may take part in the farm advisory system set up by Member States to advise farmers with regard to compliance with regulatory requirements on management matters and good farming and environmental conditions.

Integrated administration and control system (IACS)

Each Member State must set up an integrated administration and control system which enables the efficiency and monitoring of the support granted to farmers by the EU to be improved. Through this electronic system, the Member State is able to deal with aid applications and be assured through administrative checks and on-site checks that payments are made properly, in order to prevent and, if necessary, manage irregularities and recover undue amounts.

Payment

Full payments are to be made to beneficiaries in one or two instalments per year between 1 December and 30 June of the following calendar year. The Commission may authorise advances. Farmers who have artificially created the conditions required for obtaining payments will not receive them.

SINGLE PAYMENT SCHEME

The single payment scheme allocates aid to farmers irrespective of their production. The principal aim of this system of support is to ensure greater income stability for farmers. The latter henceforth receive the same amount of support regardless of their rate of production. This enables them to align their production with market demands. The aim of the Single Payment Scheme is also to improve the competitiveness and sustainability of agriculture.

National ceilings

Budget ceilings for the Single Payment Scheme for each Member State are published each year in a Commission Regulation.

National reserve

Member States set up a national reserve to grant rights to payments to new farmers and to those deemed to be in special circumstances, and to establish rights for farmers in areas subject to restructuring and/or development programmes.

Payment entitlements

In order to benefit from the Single Payment Scheme, farmers must first have payment entitlements, which they must declare together with the eligible hectares. The payment entitlements may be transferred from one farmer to another under certain conditions.

Historic implementation

In the “historic model”, entitlements are calculated based on the amount of direct payments each farmer has received during a reference period (generally the years 2000, 2001 and 2002. Other calculation options are possible in specific cases or when other integrations are concerned). Each direct payment is calculated by dividing the reference amount by the number of hectares which are entitled to the support received.

Regional implementation

Member States may opt to allocate payments at regional level. In that case, regional ceilings are to be established and divided among the farmers in the region. The value of their entitlements is obtained by dividing the financial envelope by the number of hectares declared in the first year of application of the scheme.

Partial implementation

Member States have had the option of partially implementing the single payment system. In this case, Member States keep part of the coupled aid and pay it to farmers in the form of a supplementary payment and according to production. These options will disappear in 2012, except for sheep/goats and suckler cows, two productions which may prove to be crucial in order to avoid agricultural land being abandoned in certain regions.

CONTEXT

This Regulation forms part of the “health check” component of the Common Agricultural Policy after the 2003 reform. Since then the CAP has been resolutely aimed at simplification by making most payments directly to farmers under the Single Payment Scheme. Using the experience acquired since the introduction of the SPS, the Commission is extending the simplification of the CAP into the area of cross-compliance and that of existing coupled aid.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 73/2009

1.2.2009

–

OJ L 30, 31.1.2009
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 1250/2009

22.12.2009

–

OJ L 338, 19.12.2009

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Leave a reply

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > Environment

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 86/278/EEC of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture [See amending acts].

Summary

Sewage sludge has valuable agronomic properties in agriculture. In using sewage sludge account must be taken of the nutrient needs of the plants without, however, impairing neither the quality of the soil nor that of surface and ground water. Some heavy metals present in sewage sludge may be toxic to plants and humans.

Sewage sludge may be used in agriculture provided that the Member State concerned regulates its use.

The Directive lays down limit values for concentrations of heavy metals in the soil (Annex IA), in sludge (Annex IB) and for the maximum annual quantities of heavy metals which may be introduced into the soil (Annex IC).

The use of sewage sludge is prohibited if the concentration of one or more heavy metals in the soil exceeds the limit values laid down in accordance with Annex IA. The Member States must therefore take the necessary steps to ensure that those limit values are not exceeded as a result of using sludge.

Sludge must be treated before being used in agriculture but the Member States may authorise the use of untreated sludge if it is injected or worked into the soil.

The use of sludge is prohibited:

  • on grassland or forage crops if the grassland is to be grazed or the forage crops to be harvested before a certain period has elapsed (this period, fixed by the Member States, may not be less than three weeks);
  • on fruit and vegetable crops during the growing season, with the exception of fruit trees;
  • on ground intended for the cultivation of fruit and vegetable crops which are normally in direct contact with the soil and normally eaten raw, for a period of ten months preceding the harvest and during the harvest itself.

Sludge and soil on which it is used must be sampled and analysed.

Member States must keep records registering:

  • the quantities of sludge produced and the quantities supplied for use in agriculture;
  • the composition and properties of the sludge;
  • the type of treatment carried out;
  • the names and addresses of the recipients of the sludge and the places where the sludge is to be used.

Where conditions so demand, Member States may take more stringent measures than those provided for in this Directive.

Five years after notification of this Directive, and every four years thereafter, Member States must produce a consolidated report on the use of sludge in agriculture, specifying the quantities used, the criteria followed and any difficulties encountered. They must forward the report to the Commission, which will publish the information contained in it.

In the light of that report the Commission will, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals for increased protection of the soil and the environment.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 86/278/EEC

18.6.1986

18.6.1989

OJ L 181 of 4.7.1986
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 91/692/EEC

23.12.1991

1.1.1993

OJ L 377 of 31.12.1991

Regulation (EC) No 807/2003

5.6.2003

–

OJ L 122 of 16.5.2003

Regulation (EC) No 219/2009

20.4.2009

OJ L 87 of 31.3.2009

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 86/278/EEC have been incorporated in the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

Related Acts

Report from the Commission of 20 November 2009 on implementation of the community waste legislation Directive 2006/12/EC on waste, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge, Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste and Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment for the period 2004-2006 [COM(2009) 633 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
Since the adoption of the Directive on sewage sludge more than 20 years ago, no implementation problems have been reported. However there are signals that the Directive may be too limited in scope and lack ambition. Several Member States have enacted and implemented stricter limit values for heavy metals and set requirements for other contaminants. The Commission impact assessment will evaluate whether more stringent measures should be put in place and look into a possibility of extending the scope of the Directive to other types of sludges and applications other than agriculture.

Report from the Commission of 19 July 2006 on implementation of the Community waste legislation: Directive 75/442/EEC, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge, Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste and Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste for the period 2001-2003 [COM(2006) 406 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
According to this report, several Member States have set concentration limits at levels below those in the Directive. In addition, average concentrations of heavy metals in sludge used in agriculture are significantly lower than those specified in the Directive. Most EU-15 Member States registered an increase in sludge generation. Seven Member States report using at least 50% of the sludge they generate in agriculture. The Commission considers that using sewage sludge as fertiliser on agricultural soils remains one of the best environmental options, provided it poses no threat to the environment or to animal and human health.

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 19 May 2003 on the implementation of Community waste legislation, in particular Directive 75/442/EEC on waste, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge and Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, for the period 1998-2000 [COM(2003) 250 final Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 10 January 2000 on the implementation of Community waste legislation for the period 1995-1997 (Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/689/EEC, 75/439/EEC and 86/278/EEC) [COM(1999) 752 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The Commission notes in this report that there were no major problems in the formal transposition of Directive 86/278 on sewage sludge into national law. The Directive has been successful in preventing crop contamination by pathogens caused by the use of sludge on agricultural soils. However, few Member States have very high sludge reuse rates. As the Commission foresees an increase of about 40 % of sludge production by 2005, it seems appropriate to completely revise the provisions of the Directive.

Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament of 27 February 1997 concerning the application of Directives 75/439/EEC, 75/442/EEC, 78/319/EEC and 86/278/EEC on waste management [COM(97) 23 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
As Directive 86/278/EEC was published on 17 June 1986, the Member States had to draw up their first report by 17 June 1991. Only six Member States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, France and the United Kingdom) sent their 1991/1992 report. A second report covering the years 1991-1994 should have been submitted by 17 June 1995.
The Commission’s analysis covers the period 1991-1994 on the basis of the reports submitted by five Member States (Belgium, Spain, France, the United Kingdom and Portugal).
The report notes that some Member States have failed to adopt all the national measures needed to transpose this Directive. As a result, Belgium in particular was sentenced by the Court of Justice (judgment of 3 May 1994, Case C-260/93) for failing to transpose the Directive.
Following the adoption of Directive 91/692/EEC standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment, the Commission adopted a standard questionnaire for drawing up these reports, first used for the 1991-1994 report. The report outlines the state of play regarding national laws and the minimum limit values set by the five Member States which submitted their report. The Commission feels that, under the current circumstances, it is difficult to draw final conclusions as the reports of several Member States are missing and some of the reports submitted were incomplete. However, it is of the view that the Directive was, on the whole, well implemented as regards the permitted concentration of heavy metals in sludge for use in agriculture, as the level is in general lower than the limit values laid down in Annex I B to the Directive.

Conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture

Leave a reply

Conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > Environment

Conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 870/2004 of 24 April 2004 establishing a Community programme on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1467/94

Summary

During the period 2004-06, the Commission is implementing a Community programme covering plant, microbial and animal genetic resources * which are or could be of use in agriculture. The amount allocated to the programme is 10 million.

The Commission selects the actions to be part-financed under the programme on the basis of calls for proposals and following evaluation by independent experts. Proposals may be submitted by a public sector body or any natural or legal person who is a national of a Member State and established in the Community, in an EFTA/EEA country, or in an associated country in accordance with the conditions stipulated in a bilateral agreement.

The actions, which may last for a maximum of four years, may be of three types:

  • targeted actions, part-financed up to a maximum of 50% of their total cost and including:
    – transnational actions promoting the ex situ and in situ conservation *, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture;
    – the establishment of a European decentralised, permanent and widely accessible web-based inventory of genetic resources currently conserved in situ including in situ/on-farm genetic resources conservation activities;
    – the establishment of a European decentralised, permanent and widely accessible web-based inventory of the ex situ collections (gene banks) and in situ resources;
    – the promotion of regular exchanges of technical and scientific information among competent organisations in the Member States;
  • concerted actions, part-financed up to a maximum of 80% of their total cost, transnational in character and promoting the exchange of information on thematic issues for the purpose of improving the coordination of actions and programmes in the sphere concerned;
  • accompanying actions, part-financed up to a maximum of 80% of their total cost and comprising information, dissemination and advisory actions, training courses and the preparation of technical reports.

Once an action has been approved, the Commission will conclude a grant agreement with the participants setting out detailed criteria for the reporting, dissemination, protection and exploitation of the results of the action.

The Commission is assisted by a Committee on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture. The Commission may also call on the assistance of scientific and technical experts for the implementation of the programme.

At the end of the programme, the Commission will appoint a group of independent experts to report on the implementation of the Regulation, to assess the results and to make appropriate recommendations. The group’s report will be submitted to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.

Key terms used in the act
  • “Plant genetic resources” means those of agricultural crops, horticultural crops, medicinal plants and aromatics, fruit crops, forest trees and wild flora which are or could be of use in agriculture.
  • “Genetic material” means any material of plant, microbial or animal origin, including reproductive and vegetative propagating material, containing functional units of heredity.
  • “In situ conservation” means the conservation of genetic material in ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species or feral breeds in their natural surroundings and, in the case of domesticated animal breeds or cultivated plant species, in the farmed environment where they have developed their distinctive properties.
  • “Ex situ conservation” means the conservation of genetic material outside its natural habitat.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 870/2004 7.5.2004 – OJ L 162 of 30.4.2004

A simplified CAP for Europe

Leave a reply

A simplified CAP for Europe

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about A simplified CAP for Europe

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

A simplified CAP for Europe

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 18 March 2009 – A simplified CAP for Europe – A success for all [COM(2009) 128 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Since 2005 the Commission has taken on a number of activities which have simplified the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from a technical * and policy * perspective.

Technical simplification

The main technical simplifications concern:

  • the repeal of legal acts deemed to be obsolete;
  • the adoption of the Regulation establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets in 2007, better known as the ‘single CMO’. This new Regulation replaces 21 individual common organisations of the market and groups them together into one single regulation;
  • the modification and streamlining of the policy on State aid, including the adoption of the de minimis Regulation in the agricultural sector in 2007;
  • a study to measure administrative costs;
  • the creation of platforms for the sharing of best practices concerning CAP simplification.

Policy simplification

The policy-related actions concern:

  • the sugar CMO reform, which merged the various quota types into one single quota. This reform also included the budget for sugar-aid into the envelope of the Single Payment Scheme and replaced intervention by private storage;
  • the Single Payment Scheme, to make it more “farmer friendly” and to simplify its functioning;
  • reforms in the fruit and vegetables and wine sectors, which integrated these sectors into the Single Payment Scheme;
  • impact assessments and evaluations, which involve stakeholders at an early stage of the legislative process and render it more transparent. They also improve the quality of proposals and the quality of debates on proposals.

Processes followed for CAP simplification

  • stakeholder consultation, screening, Action Plan;
  • the conference organised in October 2006;
  • internal training on legislative drafting;
  • IT systems: the ISAMM system (Information System for Agricultural Market Management and Monitoring) to facilitate the electronic exchange of information between Commission services and Member States is in its final development phase.

CAP simplification Action Plan

Launched at the end of 2006, the Action Plan is based on suggestions from Member States, stakeholders, producers’ organisations and the Commission. The plan had evolved to around fifty technical simplification projects by January 2009, of which 43 have been implemented.

The projects taken up concern, in particular:

  • the abolition of licences for exports of beef without export refunds;
  • egg marketing standards;
  • the abolition of the requirement that farmers should have a parcel at their disposal for at least 10 months before being able to apply for direct payments;
  • the elimination of most of the obligations relating to import and export licences;
  • specific marketing standards concerning 26 types of fruit and vegetables;
  • an amendment of the rules on cross-compliance * (for example, advance notice for on-the-spot checks); etc.

Special focus

An important accomplishment within the context of legislative simplification of the CAP was the adoption of the Council Regulation establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets, commonly referred to as the “single CMO”. The new Regulation replaces all 21 individual common organisations of the market and groups them together into one single regulation, thereby reducing the number of articles from around 920 to around 230 and repealing a total of 78 Council acts. Finally, the single CMO facilitates further simplification and reduction of administrative burden at the level of Commission implementing provisions.

Within the context of the Action Programme for reducing Administrative Burdens, a study assessing the administrative burden on farms arising from CAP was published at the end of 2007. This study, carried out in Denmark, Germany, France, Ireland and Italy, provides an assessment of the administrative costs associated with the Single Payment Scheme in 2006 and presents an outlook on future developments. The results of the study indicate that administrative burden on farms will decrease substantially. One factor is the learning curve effect and the disappearance of the administrative costs associated with the start-up of the Single Payment Scheme. The changes decided in the Health Check are another important reason.

The Health Check of the CAP reform simplifies the provisions of the Single Payment Scheme and renders the 2003 CAP reform more efficient. In particular, it stresses the need for further decoupling of support and the abolition of several schemes such as payments for energy crops and durum wheat, etc. to reduce the administrative burden on farms. The Health Check has also simplified the rules on the modulation franchise * as well as the provisions concerning the functioning of the National Reserve and payment entitlements that originate from that reserve.

Outlook

The actions under consideration concern:

  • common starting dates for legal acts;
  • communication and conservation of information;
  • a training programme for officials which involves a farm stay;
  • harmonising cross-compliance rules;
  • improvements in quality policy;
  • more regular review of legislation;
  • continuation of the Action Plan with the addition of new projects;
  • training on writing skills, to make legislation easier to read;
  • continuation of sharing best practices.

Context

This Communication takes stock of the activities carried out since the 2005 Communication on CAP simplification. As a result of the progress made in simplifying the Common Agricultural Policy, the Commission expects to achieve its objective of reducing administrative burdens by 25% by 2012.

Key terms of the Act
  • Technical simplification: implies revision of the legal framework, administrative procedures and management mechanisms to achieve streamlining and greater cost-effectiveness and attain existing policy objectives more effectively, without changing the underlying policies.
  • Policy simplification: reduces complexity through improvements to the agricultural support and rural development policy instruments. It may be described as ‘policy development with simplification implications’.
  • Cross-compliance: the payment of certain European aid is subject to compliance with basic environmental and health requirements.
  • Modulation: an instrument introduced by the 2003 reform which allows resources intended for direct aid to farmers to be transferred to rural development measures during the period up to 2013.

The CAP towards 2020

Leave a reply

The CAP towards 2020

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about The CAP towards 2020

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

The CAP towards 2020

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission of 18 November 2010 – The CAP towards 2020: Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future [COM(2010) 672 – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

This Communication identifies the challenges facing agriculture and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in the coming years. These challenges have been identified based on past experience, the current economic situation and an extensive public debate organised in 2010.

Through this Communication, the Commission is launching themes for consideration, relating to the future of the CAP. It proposes to adapt the current CAP objectives to the new challenges which have been identified. In particular, the emphasis should be on strong, quality agricultural production, on protecting natural resources and on maintaining the agricultural sector in all EU territories.

Lastly, the Commission explains which instruments would enable the fixed objectives to be met. These instruments should enable the CAP to be greener, fairer, more efficient and more effective.

OBJECTIVES

Food security

Global demand will continue to increase in the coming decades. The EU must be in a position to respond. It is essential that the EU maintains and increases its production capacity.

European citizens want high quality and a wide choice of food products, reflecting high safety, quality and animal welfare standards. A strong agricultural sector is vital for the highly competitive food industry to remain an important part of the EU economy and trade (the EU is the leading world exporter of mostly processed and high value added agricultural products).

Natural resources

Agriculture can put pressure on the environment (water pollution, soil depletion, water shortages and loss of wildlife habitats), but it can also have positive effects (climate stability, biodiversity, landscapes and resilience to flooding).

The EU shall endeavour to limit the negative effects of agriculture and to encourage its positive contributions. The future CAP shall promote energy efficiency, carbon sequestration, biomass and renewable energy production and, more generally, innovation.

Balanced territorial development

Agriculture remains an essential driver of the rural economy in the majority of EU countries. It is necessary to maintain a competitive and dynamic agricultural sector which attracts young farmers in order to preserve the vitality and potential of rural Europe.

INSTRUMENTS

Direct payments

In order to achieve the objectives stated above, the Commission plans to adapt the direct payments system to ensure that payments are better distributed and targeted.

It is proposed that future direct payments should support farmers’ basic income through the granting of a basic decoupled direct payment, with an upper ceiling, targeting of ‘active farmers’, a simple support system for small farmers and the consideration of areas with specific natural constraints.

The Commission proposes to improve the grant criteria relating to the environment through a mandatory ‘greening’ component of direct payments targeted at agricultural practices which address climate change and environmental objectives (permanent pasture, green cover, crop rotation, ecological set-aside, etc.).

Market measures

The Commission specifies that the CAP should keep the overall market orientation of agriculture while also maintaining the management tools which have demonstrated the important role they play in times of crisis or disruption. In the coming years, certain agricultural markets must evolve, in particular the regime currently in place in the sugar sector which is due to expire in 2014/2015.

The Commission believes that more general measures must be taken in order to improve the functioning of the food supply chain, which should be more transparent and within which bargaining power should be more balanced.

Rural development policy

Lastly, the Commission highlights the importance of the rural development policy which the EU carries out through the CAP. It proposes to strengthen the environmental element and to improve coordination of this policy with other European policies.

The Commission proposes to focus on the competitiveness of agriculture by encouraging innovation, promoting good management of natural resources and supporting balanced territorial development balance by encouraging local initiatives.

As well as enhancing the promotion and quality optimisation tools, the Commission believes that a risk management toolkit should be included to deal more effectively with income uncertainties and market volatility.

Information measures relating to the common agricultural policy

Leave a reply

Information measures relating to the common agricultural policy

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Information measures relating to the common agricultural policy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Information measures relating to the common agricultural policy

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 of 17 April 2000 on information measures relating to the common agricultural policy.

Summary

The aims of the information measures relating to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are:

  • explaining, implementing and developing the CAP;
  • promoting the European model of agriculture and helping people to understand it;
  • informing farmers and other parties active in rural areas;
  • raising public awareness of the issues and objectives of the CAP.

The information measures are as follows:

  • specific or annual nformation measures such as talks, audiovisual productions, information campaigns, information stands at agricultural fairs, mobile workshops, etc. presented by organisations (legal persons) established in a Member State for at least two years, such as agricultural NGOs, consumers’ associations, public authorities, the media or universities.
  • activities implemented at the Commission’s initiative.

Measures covered by a legal obligation and those receiving funding under another Community action may not claim aid under this Regulation.

The Community cofinancing rate, under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), generally amounts to 50% of the eligible costs. In special cases, it may be 75 %.

Events eligible for Community cofinancing for information measures in the field of the CAP include information measures such as televised debates, audiovisual productions, seminars, publications, participation in international events or information campaigns including several of the measures referred to above.

The Commission publishes a call for proposals in autumn each year (in 2009, publication took place on 9 September and proposals were to be submitted by 31 October).

Projects are selected on the basis of their quality and cost-effectiveness.

For measures to be cofinanced in 2010, the amount of funding is at least EUR 20 000 and at most EUR 200 000. The end of the evaluation procedure has been set at 30 April 2010 in the knowledge that the applications selected will be the subject of an agreement between the Commission and the recipients governing the rights and obligations arising from the Commission’s funding decision.

The European Commission monitors, checks on and analyses measures receiving Community funding.

The European Commission regularly issues a report on the implementation of information measures to the Parliament and to the Council.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation No 814/2000

17.4.2000

–

OJ L 100 of 17.4.2000.

Related Acts

Implementing procedures

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2208/2002 of 12 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 on information measures relating to the common agricultural policy [Official Journal L 337 of 13.12.2002].
Amended by Regulation (EC) No 1820/2004 [Official Journal L 320 of 21.10.2004].

Risk and crisis management in agriculture

Leave a reply

Risk and crisis management in agriculture

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Risk and crisis management in agriculture

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Risk and crisis management in agriculture

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council of 9 March 2005 on risk and crisis management in agriculture [COM(2005) 74 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

In this communication, the Commission proposes the introduction of measures to help farmers to manage risk and improve their response to crises. It is proposing three categories of new measures.

New options for risk and crisis management tools

Risk * (resulting in a negative outcome) and crises * may have serious economic consequences for businesses, affecting their income. Most of the instruments devised to provide assistance to cope with unforeseeable events rely on ad hoc measures.

The Commission has examined a number of instruments to accompany or partially replace the existing ad hoc emergency measures. The three options proposed by the Commission are as follows:

  • insurance against natural disasters: this would involve the provision of a financial contribution towards the premiums paid by farmers for insurance against income loss as a result of natural disaster, bad weather or disease. This measure would encourage insurance in the sector, which up to now has been underdeveloped as a result of the systemic nature of the risks involved. Reinsurance schemes are also considered;
  • supporting mutual funds: mutual funds are a means of sharing risk among groups of producers, enabling farmers to be compensated in the event of loss. In the past, funds have usually been set up on the initiative of producer groups in the same sector. The Commission is proposing that the setting up of mutual funds in the agricultural sector be encouraged by granting temporary degressive aid for their administration;
  • providing basic coverage against income crises: new instruments could be created to provide basic coverage in the event of liquidity problems or serious loss of income. The reasoning is that, while rural development programmes will be available to support major investment in restructuring and provide aid for structural adjustments, they could prove insufficient.

Training measures could be introduced under the rural development programmes to help improve awareness of current risks and improve risk management strategies.

Safety net in the event of market crisis

The instruments used to influence the market and price situation and address possible crises vary between market organisations. Following the CAP reform, safety net provisions in the event of crisis remain available in several sectors covered by the reform. For other sectors, there is currently no justification for the introduction of an additional general safety net provision. The Commission therefore rules out the introduction of a safety net clause for each common market organisation.

Financing risk and crisis management measures

The Commission proposes that these additional risk and crisis management measures should be funded under the rural development programmes (under the competitiveness priority) out of one percentage point of modulation *. Using modulation would not require additional Community expenditure and would make it possible for the Member States to use a limited amount of rural development funds for these purposes. For the new Member States, in which modulation does not apply, a method enabling those so wishing to allocate funds to these measures will have to be examined.

The use of state aid or top-ups for this type of measure would be subject to the relevant Community competition rules.

Background

An initial analysis of risk management tools was presented by the Commission in January 2001. The conclusions of the Luxembourg Council (June 2003) on the reform of the CAP include a statement by the Commission on this matter, announcing that it would examine specific measures to address risks and crises by the end of 2004.

Key terms used in the act
  • Single payment scheme: the single payment is an annual income payment to farmers calculated on the basis of the aid received over the 2000-02 reference period. The main aim of this payment is to ensure greater income stability for farmers. Farmers are free to decide what they want to produce in response to demand without losing their entitlement to support.
  • Modulation: a mechanism to progressively reduce direct payments to farmers and transfer the funds thus released to the rural development sector.
  • Risk: implies a situation that could have a variety of outcomes, for each of which the probability can be estimated.
  • Crisis: an unforeseen situation that endangers the viability of agricultural holdings, either at local level or across a whole sector of production.