The role of the environment and organic farming for the Member States economies and societies is estimated through evaluation applying the following indicators:
These valuable indicators have been applied and analysed for the EU-27. The evaluation was considered important since the EU Pillar 2 budget has been harshly reduced for the financial period 2007-2013, in contrast to the Pillar 1 budget that remained intact. On the other hand, the requirements to be fulfilled by the Rural Development programmes had to take under consideration the severe problems with the climate change and the implementation of nature preservation global programmes (e.g. Natura 2000). That is why the Pillar 2 reduced budgets needed carefully planned targeted use to guarantee the effectiveness of the programmes.
Another important indicators that have to be considered are the budget allocated to the organic farming measures in the agri-environmental programmes and the share for organic projects in other Rural Development measures.
The CAP budget is divided in two main parts: Pillar 1 for market and direct aids, Pillar 2 for rural development. However, this division is quite unfavorable for the rural development, because of the following main reasons:
Based on the EU budget for 2007, the two budgets (pillar 1 : pillar 2) ration is 77% : 23%. Speaking about total budget (EU plus national co-financing) this ratio is 67% : 33%.
Actually, the relevance of Rural Development programmes in the Member States is estimated through the distribution of the budget for the Pillars 1 and 2. The lower financial values for Pillar 2 indicate that considerable financing for it would ensure a broader range of measures that are better financially equipped and therefore more attractive to the farmers.
The effective rural development measures require certain standards, e.g. environmental standards for participation in agri-environmental programmes. That is why, keeping in compliance with these standards lead to increased public acceptance of financial support for agriculture and rural areas.
In addition to the relation to Pillar 1, Pillar 2 absolute budget values are also rather small.
New Member States show a significantly different distribution of Pillar 1 and 2 budgets. As a rule, the Pillar 2 budgets are at least equal to the Pillar 1 budgets. As the Pillar 2 budgets are co-financed by the Member States and regions, the proportions shift towards a minimum share 60:40 (pillar 2 : pillar 1). The only old Member States exhibiting a similar profile are Austria (46%) and Portugal (43%), based on EU funded budgets, and Finland (62%), Austria (60%), Luxemburg (59%) and Portugal (49%) based on a calculation with national co-financed budgets.
The Rural Development programmes budget has to be planned in a way to support financially a wide range of measures, such as support for advisory systems and quality production, farm investment, agri-environmental programmes, infrastructure measures on community level, etc. The good financing of these measures is a prerequisite for their effectiveness. The Rural Development regulations have shaped a framework within which the Member States had the opportunity to tailor their national and regional programmes considering the local circumstances and conditions. Thus, each development programme will set out priorities that are accustomed to the country/region specific conditions. In this way the different programmes will have an important impact on the further development and orientation of agriculture and rural areas.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi-ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
