Ursula von der Leyen – political guidelines

 16/07/2019

 

Ursula von der Leyen

 

On 16 July 2019, Ursula von der Leyen (DE, EPP), the designated Candidate for President of the European Commission – chosen and backed by the European Council, presented her political guidelines for the upcoming five years to the Members of European Parliament. In it she has made promises to win the support of other groups such as the liberals and socialists to create the needed majority. Nevertheless, for some of these reforms to succeed an approval from Member States is required too.

Her Political Guidelines focus on six headline ambitions for Europe over the next five years and well beyond:

  • A European Green Deal
  • An economy that works for people
  • A Europe fit for the digital age
  • Protecting our European way of life
  • A stronger Europe in the world
  • A new push for European democracy

full note available on FE members area 

2% administrative cost and 15 hours a year: is the 2013 CAP really burdensome for farmers?

11 July 2019

The current CAP – and in particular the 2013 CAP reform – has been accused for a long time now of generating too much administrative burden for farmers. It has been called too complex, expensive and cumbersome. This has generated calls that the CAP needs further simplification. Hence, for its new CAP proposal, the European Commission has expressed that it wishes to propose a more flexible system as a way to simplify and modernize the way the CAP works. In doing so, Agricultural Commissioner Phil Hogan has previously said “simplification has been one of his number one priority since being appointed”and thus the new CAP proposal “will translate into real simplification both for administrations and farmers.”

However, on the 8th of July, the Commission published its own study (Analysis of administrative burden arising from the CAP)[i], created in last November that examines the current costs and administrative burden of the IACS (Integrated Administrative and Control System) based on the 2013 CAP reform, and aimed to “contribute to reflections on simplification and improvement of the systems and procedures for the management of the CAP implementation.” (The study was designed before the publication of the proposals for the post 2020 CAP and therefore as a consequence it does not provide an in depth analysis of the administrative costs of the CAP proposal currently under discussion.)

Despite the previous belief, the study has showed quite the opposite as it comes to the conclusion that farmers did not perceive a significant increase in administrative costs since the 2013 reform. However, it states that ”the 2013 reform led to an increase of the administrative burden on administrations, which has helped to avoid a significant increase of the burden on the beneficiaries”, the farmers.

The study indicates that the “total estimated cost of administrative burden for farmers ranges from €12.5 in Malta to €10,308 in Germany per year” with “overall the median total costs being €236 per farmer and year.”It also states that as a proportion of total farm costs, the median cost share for CAP-related administrative burden is estimated at about 0.4%” and as a “proportion of total CAP aid received the median cost of the administrative burden is estimated at 2%”. Time wise, “the overall median time spent on CAP related administrative tasks was at 15 hours per year” for the whole interviewed sample of farmers, which they described as “part of the job”.

Regarding the administrations, “IACS administrative costs are estimated to represent around just 3% of the annual CAP budget” being it “estimated at between €1.7bn and €1.9bn” or €10.47 per hectare of utilized agricultural area (UAA).”

Thus contrary to the argument that the administrative cost of the CAP is burdensome and expensive the study reveals that compared to other funds it is below both the “overall rate for European Structural and Investment Funds (which are estimated at 4% of the public expenditures) and the administrative costs of the EU (representing around 6% of the total EU budget).”

Nevertheless, the administrative costs vary greatly between the Member States, which is mainly due to their “country specific characteristics” such as the differences within their agricultural sector and administrative structures, organizations, and IT systems. Such finding indicates that this diverging administrative costs could most likely be amplified by the Commission’s CAP proposal as it would give the responsibility to each Member State to build its own agricultural policy, losing the ‘common’ aspect of the Common Agricultural Policy, and thus requiring more administrative capacities at national and regional levels.

The Commission has promoted the slogan of simplification as the basis and as a central feature for the current reform proposal. However, the overall findings of the study undercut the argument that the current CAP’s administrative costs are onerous or expensive for farmers.

More than a total overall of the administration of the policy, the study recommends “automation, digitalization, and new technologies for management and controls”, which can help mitigate the related costs of CAP.

 

 

[i]https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/external-studies/2018-analysis-adm-burden-arising-cap/final-report_en.pdf

 

New Breeding Techniques: strong support at the romanian informal meeting

 

An informal meeting of EU Ministers of Agriculture and Fisheries was held at the beginning of June in Romania. Among the main topics on the agenda, agricultural research & innovation was central. MEP De Castro made a point on NBTs by highlighting their “substantive sustainability potential”.

EU Health Commissioner Andriukaitis never misses a chance to reiterate his positive attitude and overall support for NPBTs. “A new EU legislation that considers the latest advanced technologies is needed” he pointed out.

The Commissioner also took part in CRISPRcon 2019 event organized by Wageningen University, during which farmers, scientists, government officials, business owners, NGOs, industry representatives, theologists, biotech companies, were able to exchange opinions, ideas and concerns on the latest developments in the gene editing field and overall its policy future (i.e. applications, regulatory aspects, etc.).

Finally, new, potential “upgrades” of CRISPR gene editing technique are taking ground on the other side of the Atlantic.

 

full note available on FE members area 

Wine sector: the published final figures of the Wine CMO

 

June started with the awaited EC publication of the final figures on the “Financial execution of the national support programme 2019-2023”of the Wine CMO.

While, in terms of wine market dynamics, latest figures by the Spanish Wine Market Observatory (OeMv) presented a first analysis for the first quarter of 2019, during which wine shipments from Spain grew by 6.3% in volume, while they decreased by 6.1% in value terms.

The UIV Wine Observatory also published its comprehensive “Wine by Numbers”report, which shows that overall, in the first quarter of 2019 the main wine markets recorded a slowdown.

Finally, Wine Intelligence recently released a report which provides an in-depth look at alternative wine opportunity across 15 global wine markets. A growing interest for the so-called “alternative wine categories”such as Sustainable, Organic, Lower-alcohol, especially among young consumers, has been reported.

 

full note available on FE members area 

Negotiations on CAP reform: a differed partial general approach

 

June was marked as follows:

  • At the informal summit in Sibiu on 3 and 4 June, the Romanian Presidency of the Council took note of the fact that it would not finally lead towards a partial general approach to the reform regulations, as Member States prefer not to go any further in the negotiations in the absence of financial prospects.
  • At the Agricultural and Fisheries Council of June 18 in Luxembourg, ministers praising the progress report on the reform also noted the many points that will be on the agenda under the Finnish presidency and remain blocked, pending the clarification on the 2021-2027 MFF.

June: highlights in chronology

10/06 Last SCA under the Romanian presidency reveals the extent of the construction

18/06 Report praised… but much remains to be done

 

full note available on FE members area 

 

Negotiations for the EU Budget: any figures at this stage

 

The last “balance sheet” of the discussions for the future Multiannual Financial Framework was presented to the European Affairs Council, but the document does not contain any figures at this stage, neither on the total volume nor on the amounts broken down according to the different headings. While the Commission insists that the deadline should be respected, the European Council of 20 and 21 June did not do more than inviting to follow the discussions this autumn.

June: highlights in chronology

13/06 Commissioner Oettinger pushes to maintain the timetable

18/06 Presentation of budget talks: no figures for the CAP

20-21/06 Details on the next MFF: rendez-vous in October 2019

 

full note available on FE members area 

National plans for Energy and Climate must match EU ambitions and targets

Brussels, 12 June 2019

Governments can craft appropriate frameworks under Effort Sharing Regulations – the National plans for Climate and Energy to be approved by the European Commission should match the overall EU ambition – agricultural sources of energy (biofuels and biogas) are existing and cost effective solutions that can go along with sustainable electricity alternative in order to reduce EU dependency to carbon intensive energies. 

The ten years to 2030 will be crucial in the global fight against climate change. Based on this scientific consensus, the European Union set ambitious targets. In the coming months, the European Commission will assess the National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) submitted by the Member States. It will be of an utmost importance to make sure that those plans deliver on the pan-EU ambition and define a policy path able to transform global commitment into practice.

During Farm Europe’s Green Energy Platform Workshop today, presentations have shown that not only solutions exist in the short term but those solutions can be effective at an affordable price. The right mix should include not only sustainable electricity, but also the capacity of EU-sourced biomass to deliver low carbon energy via biofuels and biogas.

“Realistic and affordable solutions are urgently needed to reach the EU’s 30% savings target.  NECP policies that combine electric driving and sustainable biofuels are the most effective pathway to high impact carbon savings for Member States,” Carlo Hamelinck, Associate Director of Navigant, the international sustainable energy consultancy said, presenting a report assessing the most effective strategies to be implemented by the Member States.

Success in National plans means mobilizing many solutions with all options needed in combination, in particular in the transport sector, which is one of the most challenging sectors to achieve carbon savings. According to the Navigant research report* biofuels provide an immediate solution to decarbonising energy by directly displacing fossil fuels in existing combustion fleets. They reduce liquid fuel emissions by 65/70% and account for 5% of energy in EU transport today.

Governments can devise appropriate frameworks under the Effort Sharing Regulations. Support policies with strict sustainability requirements can drive biofuels’ carbon performance and stimulate increased volumes of alternative fuels. Biomass potential is today underutilised. Agriculture can deliver the volumes required sustainably, with additional socio-economic benefits for Member States.

Biofuels have the lowest carbon abatement cost of alternative fuels, and electric driving the highest, in the Navigant study region. Measured in cost per tonne of CO2 equivalent today, electric driving costs exceed €700, and conventional biofuels €200. Electric costs will decrease, but biofuel cost will fall even faster.  By 2030 the abatement cost is expected to fall below €200 for electric, and to around €20 for conventional biofuels. The difference arises because electric driving is more expensive per KM driven and the average carbon intensity of grid electricity in the EU is considerable.

 

*The Workshop was organised by the Green Energy Platform to mark to publication of the final Navigant research report “2030 Transport Decarbonisation Options” commissioned by Farm Europe (Ecofys2019_Transport decarbonisation 2030 CEE). The research was conducted across nine EU member states in the CEE region.  Farm Europe is a Brussels based multicultural think tank that aims to stimulate thinking on rural economies.

Wine sector: Chinese slowdown in wine imports

This month, the main highlights for the wine sector at EU and global level range from further reflections and thoughts on copper use (in France mainly), new adopted rules (at EU level), which are aimed at simplifying and homogenizing wine making practices in the EU while increasing the consistency between EU oenological practices and international oenological codex of the OIV, and discussions on re-discovered (“modern”) winemaking techniques.

While, in terms of wine market dynamics, latest figures show that, globally speaking, (i) wine markets are becoming more heterogeneous, (ii) the Chinese slowdown in wine imports (- 25%) had quite an impact on main EU wine producers (Spain -40%, France -35% and Italy -19%). Whereas, on the U.S. side, in the first three months of 2019 imports decreased in value terms but increased in quantities (-3.4% and a slight growth in volume of +1.6%).

Finally, main trends in wine consumption that have been identified by IWSR are as follows: (1) the overall expected reduction in wine consumption (mainly among young people) with however an increased attention to the quality/price ratio, and (2) the “health consciousness” aspect among consumers.

 

full note available on FE members area 

New Breeding Techniques: pressure for a unified EU approach

 

The ECJ ruling on NBTs of last July continues to provide ground for debates at EU level (and not only). At the end of last month, 22 European business organizations representing a vast array of stakeholders (i.g. producers, processors and traders’ groups) expressed once again their concerns by calling for a substantive legislative change on the subject.

At the same time, the Australian government recently decided to not regulate the use of gene-editing techniques in plants, animals and human cell lines that do not introduce new genetic material, alongside the U.S. and Japan’s examples. Russia is on the same path, having recently announced a new big investment in a federal research programme on gene-editing aimed at developing 10 new varieties of gene-edited crops and animals by 2020.

Finally, on May 14th, on the occasion of the last Agriculture and Fisheries Council, Ministers were informed by the Dutch delegation about the follow up to the ruling of the ECJ on organisms obtained by mutagenesis. A unified EU approach regarding the implementation of the EU GMO legislation was at the core of the discussion.

 

full note available on FE members area 

Negotiations on CAP reform: experts put the brakes on the calendar

May was marked as follows:

– EU Agriculture Ministers spoke during last Agri-Fish Council meeting on the proposed CAP performance framework, with positions oscillating between an annual evaluation, an evaluation every two years and two evaluations over the whole budget programming period.

– Experts from 5 Member States having met in SCA, discussed sectoral interventions and expressed their reservations about the pace driven by the Romanian Presidency which was still aiming to reach a partial general agreement before the end of June, while the next Multiannual Financial Framework remains uncertain.

– In early June, at the informal Council in Romania, the Presidency had to acknowledge the impossibility of reaching a partial approach, which was opposed  by almost 20 delegations.

May: highlights in chronology

14/05 Strategic Plans: Ministers Review Performance Framework

20/05 Experts put the brakes on the calendar

28/05 Phil Hogan “sells” his reform to young farmers

 

full note available on FE members area