BirdLife

In this Section

Agriculture in Europe

Agriculture and biodiversity in the EU

Shortcomings of the current CAP

BirdLife's vision for the future of the CAP

BirdLife's vision for the future of the CAP part 2

BirdLife International's detailed CAP proposal in coalition with EEB, IFOAM, EFNCP and WWF.

The CAP Health Check

“Could do better - How is the EU Rural Development policy delivering for biodiversity?”

Through the green smokescreen - how is CAP cross compliance delivering for biodiversity?

Less Favoured Areas (LFAs) and High Nature Value (HNV) farmland

BirdLife's view on the 'Food security crisis'

Proposals for the future CAP: a joint position from the European Landowners’ Organization and BirdLife International

BirdLife's work related to EU agriculture

Agriculture in Europe
EU Policy Issues

See Also

Biofuels - Why the EU needs to drop its biofuel target

Printer friendly view

Subscribe to News

 Bookmark & Share Bookmark & Share

Change Language

BirdLife International's vision for the future of the CAP

Andy Hay (rspb-images.com)
Corn bunting Miliaria calandra, a farmland bird species that is under serious decline.
Zoom In | Hi-Res

4) Support High Nature Value farmland

Land abandonment is a major biodiversity concern in many parts of Europe, it affects all marginal areas of the EU, from the Scotland Highlands to the Mediterranean, but the new Member States are particularly struggling as traditional farming systems collapse. The poor economic viability of marginal High Nature Value farmland means that targeted financial support will be required to enhance the competitiveness of these farming systems in a sustainable way.

Support for High Nature Value farmland needs to be targeted specifically at farms practising appropriate land management, and should include basic management requirements tailored to the individual farming system and designed to ensure the continued delivery of the public benefits associated with it. Alongside the specific support at the farm level, social and economic investment should be channelled towards areas of High Nature Value farmland. This could be based on the competitiveness and diversification measures in the current Rural Development Regulation, and should aim to improve the rural economy in a sustainable way, through, for example, building local and added value food chains and helping land managers benefit from ecotourism.

5) Ensure environmental schemes deliver their objectives

Rural development and Agri-environment schemes depend on Member State and regional governments for implementation, and have produced both good and bad results over the years. The following guidelines are necessary for the schemes to deliver their objectives.

The schemes should:

  • Reward farmers for delivering public goods and should be targeted at the achievement of specific and measurable environmental outcomes, such as the conservation of certain species or habitats.
  • Be backed by a budget sufficient to deliver their aims
  • Be based on good science, and be agronomically feasible and practical
  • Continue to evolve and develop as knowledge grows
  • Target primarily existing biodiversity interest, thereafter on ecological restoration where it can be demonstrated that there is a real potential for habitat reconstruction and species recolonisation
  • Monitor their environmental impact, with the results feeding into the development of the scheme
  • Involve stakeholders, including farmers and environmental experts, in their development.

Furthermore, Agri-environment scheme must be made more attractive to smaller farmers, who are often put off by the application process and the relatively small payments they receive. This can be achieved by simplifying the application procedure and learning from countries that enjoy high uptake among small farmers, such as Austria.

Read more: BirdLife's report 'Agri-environment schemes and biodiversity: lessons learnt and examples from across Europe' (PDF 218KB)

6) Put policies in place to adapt to and mitigate climate change

The EU’s agriculture needs to reduce its own greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Currently, agriculture in the EU is responsible for an estimated 9% of GHG emissions, and much of the emissions are linked to unsustainable, intensive farming practices, such as the excessive application of artificial fertilisers. Sustainable practices can, as a result, contribute to reducing the agricultural sector’s GHG emissions - and deliver other environmental objectives at the same time, such as reducing diffuse pollution and conserving biodiversity.

Climate change will pose significant adaptation challenges to agriculture, and it is likely that we will see shifting cropping and agricultural practices as climatic conditions change. These can lead to significant shifts in the ecology of farmland, therefore wildlife and other environmental concerns will have to be accommodated. This can be achieved through, for example, carefully choosing and locating new crops, together with environment practices designed to maximise environmental benefits and avoid negative impacts.

In order to help wildlife cope with new climatic conditions and move to more suitable areas, the farming landscape will need to provide corridors and transitionary habitats, and key wildlife habitats will need to be enlarged and buffered through sympathetic management of adjacent farmland (more about climate change).

 

Related publication: 'New Challenges, New CAP' - BirdLife's vision for the future of the EU CAP

 

Next Page » BirdLife International's detailed CAP proposal in coalition with EEB, IFOAM, EFNCP and WWF.


Sponsored by:

EU flag

European Union
This website is part-financed by the European Union


Advertising more »

BirdLife GAM Code V1