EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 8.7.2008 
SEC(2008) 2226 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
accompanying the 
 
Proposal for a 
 
COUNCIL REGULATION amending Regulati ons (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing 
of the common agricultural policy and (EC) No 1234/2007 establishing a common 
organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural 
products (Single CMO Regulation) in or der to set up a School Fruit Scheme 
 
Impact Assessment summary 
  
{COM(2008) 442 final} 
{SEC(2008) 2225} 
 
EN 2   EN 1. W HY A SCHOOL FRUIT SCHEME ? 
In September 2007, when the European Union adopted a reform of the Fruit and Vegetable 
regime, a key objective was to reverse the dec lining consumption of fruit and vegetables. 
When approving the reform, the Council invited the Commission  "In light of the dramatic 
increase in obesity amongst schoolchildren […] to  come forward with a proposal for a school 
fruit scheme as soon as possibl e based on an impact assessment of  the benefits, practicability 
and administrative costs involved." 
The importance of fruit and vegetables as pa rt of a healthy diet is advocated by the 
Commission White Paper on Nutriti on, Overweight and Obesity, which stresses the need for 
coherent action at European level. It states that “a School Fruit Scheme would be a step in the 
right direction ”. 
In its report on the EU's 2008 draft ge neral budget, the European Parliament  "re-emphasises 
its strong commitment to the proper budgetary endowment of funds for school fruit and 
vegetables" and "calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal…" . 
• Falling consumption 
In recent years the consumption of fruit & vegetables has been falling in the EU. As most fruit 
and vegetables are highly perishable , the level of waste is high; the per capita  consumption of 
fruit and vegetables is therefore very difficult  to measure and is estimated on the basis of 
production and trade data. 
Average daily per capita  consumption in EU-27 in 2006 is estim ated at 380 g net; it will fall 
to 360 g net per day by 2010 if th e current downward trend continue s. The figures relate to the 
population as a whole independent of age. 
Consumption varies considerably  between Member States. In general, major producing MS 
record higher consumption rate s, but a negative trend has recently been seen even in 
Mediterranean countries. Further the situation is particularly worrying among children. There 
has been an important change in the diet of the young population, and consumption of fruit 
and vegetables is significantly lower than what it used to be. One of th e factors responsible for 
the low consumption by children is the a pparent lack of produce availability. 
Consequently, the majority of  Europeans and in particular  children fail to meet the 
recommended by the World Health Organisati on minimum net intake of 400 g per day. 
• The health issue 
Weight problems and obesity are increasing in the EU, especially among children: an 
estimated 22 million children are overweight; 5.1 million of these are obese (EU-25). This 
child obesity figure is expected to rise by 400 000 per year, leading to a range of health, psychological and social problems with a high cost to society (see point 3.3 of the Impact 
Assessment Report) . 
 
EN 3   EN • Social and economic aspects 
There is a strong link between low income, social  factors and insufficien t intake of fruit and 
vegetables. The lower the income, the lower the level of consumption of fruit and vegetables. 
Data suggest that the new MS would benefit most from increas ing their consumption. Cardio-
vascular disease, in particular, is more preval ent there and has an earlier onset than in the 
EU-15. This is one of the ma ny health problems linked with  a low intake of fruit and 
vegetables (point 3.4) . 
2. S CIENTIFIC EVIDENCE  
Studies show that, as long as certain conditions are met, SFS are an effective tool to durably 
increase the consumption of fruit and vegetables. In particular, it  is proven that  a School Fruit 
Scheme should not only (some say even not ma inly) concentrate on the provision of fruit and 
vegetables at educational establishments (sc hools) but also include a set of accompanying 
measures aimed at awareness raising (point 4).  
Improving the eating habits of children and a dolescents is an important task for improving 
public health, and reducing the long-term risk of strokes and cancer, as well as chronic 
diseases such as diabetes. Actions targeting healthy nutrition need to occur in childhood or 
adolescence, to prevent or reverse the advers e health effects of overweight and poor eating 
habits .  
Studies show that healthy eating habits are fo rmed in childhood: high consumers of fruit and 
vegetables in childhood remain high consumers; low consumers in childhood remain low 
consumers as adults with negative consequences for their own children. 
Educational establishments are the best setting for reshaping and influencing the eating habits 
of children at the stage when they are formed. 
The conditions for a SFS successful implem entation are underlined in the report (point 5.3) . 
Studies show that, to be effective, it is impor tant that produce is di stributed free of charge . 
3. C URRENT SITUATION  
Initiatives focused on increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among school children 
already exist at EU leve l and in certain MS at national or local level. 
The fruit and vegetable reform increased the budget for co-funded information and promotion 
measures for these products by €6 million. For pr omotion campaigns aimed at school children 
the Community’s financial contribution is 60%. 
Other EU programmes aim to improve physical  and mental health and reduce health 
inequalities throughout the Comm unity, while substantial EU f unds have gone into obesity-
related research and projects on the benefi cial effects of fruit and vegetables. 
In the MS, different models exist (point 5.2)  which main limitations are: often small-scale and 
local; no assured continuity; few in the new MS , where consumption is generally lowest; not 
all schemes include accompanying measures, wh ich are essential to ensure the scheme's 
efficiency. 
 
EN 4   EN 4. O BJECTIVES (POINT 7) 
The overall aim of an EU SFS is to provide a policy and funding framew ork for Member State 
initiatives, to durably increase the share of fru it and vegetables in the diets of children, at the 
stage when their eating habits are formed. This represents an investment, which would in the 
future help reduce public health  costs resulting from poor diet. 
The main specific aims would be to arrest declining consumption of  fruit and vegetables, 
increase long-term consumption among children, fost er healthy eating habits  that continue into 
adulthood; enable a significant number of schoolchildren to eat fruit and vegetables, so 
providing equal opportunities  for all children in the EU and contributing to social cohesion. 
5. P OLICY OPTIONS (POINT 8) 
The four options explored are not mutually ex clusive; some elements could be combined. 
Impact on the consumption of fruit and vegeta bles and consequent health benefits would 
depend on the scale of implementation and the programme's long-term continuity. 
Option 1 – Status Quo  
No new initiative at European level. 
Option 2 – Networking  
Community intervention limited to supporting Member State SFS under three main headings: 
informing the public (webpage, brochures…); providing tools for ac tion (portal for SFS 
projects, expert database …); large-scale annual conference. 
Option 3 – Supporting initiatives 
EU support for initiatives promoting fruit and vegetable consumption in educational 
establishments, but excluding f unding of product purchases. M easures could include those 
aimed at changing children's eating habits, such as training and awareness-raising, the 
production of promotional material and site visits. 
Implementation would be modelled roughly on cu rrent promotion programmes, with an EU 
contribution of 60%. Co-financing would be co mpulsory and proposing organisations would 
also have to fund part (e.g. 20%) of the programme's cost. 
Option 4 – Driving initiatives 
A single, flexible EU SFS framework, with voluntary participation by MS. 
The EU would distribute the budget, using as common objective criteria the number of 
children in 6–10 core age group. Pa rticipating MS would then dr aw up a strategy, to include 
three elements: free distribution in educationa l establishments; accompanying measures such 
as promotion campaigns and awarene ss raising; monitoring and evaluation. 
The purchase of fruit & vegetables (including logistics and distributio n) would be 50% co-
financed by the European Union, except in conv ergence regions (75%). An annual financial 
ceiling of €90M could be supplemen ted by MS and/or private funding. 
 
EN 5   EN Accompanying measures would usually be funded by MS but, where possible under the 
existing legal framework, could be supported und er the EU promotion of agricultural products. 
6. A NALYSIS OF IMPACTS  
• Economic (point 9.1 and Annex 8)  
Increased demand arising from an EU SFS w ould have a positive impact on the fruit and 
vegetable market. 
Options 1 and 2  would have no measurable impact on demand or consumption. Option 3  is 
likely to have a stronger effect. 
Option 4  could lead to the development of new, tasty, ready-to-eat products for children. A 
direct increase of 97 500 tonnes of fruit and vege tables per year could be  the result, based on a 
daily portion of 120 grams for 30 weeks. Studies show  a lasting increase in  the intake of fruit 
and vegetables of between 0.4 and 1.1 portions per day. Assuming an average increase of 
0.7 portions consumed daily by children, this w ould result in approximately 800 000 tonnes of 
additional fruit and vegetables consumed yearly. 
Monitoring and evaluation is important to assess long-term impacts. Studies suggest that SFS 
can be an efficient way to sustainably incr ease consumption of fruit and vegetables. 
• Budgetary (point 9.2 and Annex 13)  
Option 1  would have no effect on the EU or MS budgets. 
Option 2  would require an annual EU budget of €1.3 M. There would be no cost to Member 
States. 
Option 3 : the fruit and vegetable CMO reform in cludes an increase of the EU promotion 
budget by €6 million, which could be used to la unch an EU SFS. Member States would have 
to provide co-financing, in additi on to obligatory private financing. 
Option 4  could be launched at an EU budget cost of €90 million for the provision of fruit and 
vegetables, including logistical costs. It is assu med that produce is given free of charge once a 
week throughout the school year  (average 30 weeks) at an av erage cost of €0.20 per day per 
child to all 26 million children in the 6–10 core age group. Member States would have to 
finance half the produce cost (25% in conve rgence regions) and accompanying measures. 
Total budget: €156 million of which 90 EU and 66 national budget. 
Healthcare savings and on avoidi ng lost hours at work could be  substantial in the long term 
based on figures from the Netherlands and Denmark. 
• Social (point 9.3)  
Public health and cohesion  (Annex 9)  
The aim is to foster healthy eating habits am ong schoolchildren, so co ntributing to a lasting 
improvement in health and a d ecline in obesity: maintaining healthy body weight; reducing the 
risk of chronic non-communicable diseases. 
 
EN 6   EN Option 1 would not a have the desired impact. 
Options 2 and 3  could have a limited impact on the c ohesion aspect; exchange of experience 
could help improve the effec tiveness of current schemes. 
Option 4  could have the strongest impact, as it pr ovides for free distribution of fruit and 
vegetables. 
Promoting equal opportunities (Annex 10) 
The aim is to facilitate access to school fruit schemes by childr en in poorer regions and among 
disadvantaged sections of the population.  
Free provision of fruit and vege tables can contribute to be tter nutrition and may have a 
positive influence on learning ability, which is know n to be affected by poor  nutrition. This is 
more prevalent in children from deprived backgrounds. SFS can combat poor nutrition and can 
help lessen diet inequalitie s among socio-economic groups. 
Because it provides for the free distribution of fruit and vegetables, Option 4 would have a 
much greater impact than Option 3.  
Employment and job creation 
Increased production is expected to imply some extra labour. Fu rther new jobs could be linked 
to innovation and research. Option 4 woul d have a stronger impact than Option 3. 
• Closer links with EU citizens 
By helping reconnect urban citizens with food and its producers, Option 4 would do most to 
positively influence public perceptions. Inform ation provision under Options 2 and 3 could 
also have a positive impact. 
• Environmental impact 
As the management of any scheme would be d ecentralised, the environmental impact of the 
different options would depend on how they are implemented. 
• Administrative impact (point 9.6 and Annex 14)  
Option 2: no significant extra burden on either  Member States or the Commission. 
Option 3:  additional administrative burden at Member State level, which could be significant 
with a significant in crease of EU funding. 
Option 4: additional resources needed at Member Stat e level; two full-time officials needed at 
EU level, at least in the first years of implementation. 
• Impact on third countries and international relations 
An EU SFS would have to be in full accordance with the EU internati onal trade obligations. 
 
EN 7   EN • Proportionality and EU Value Added (point 6 and 9.8) 
Options 2 and 3 represent "traditional" EU act ions, whose value is proven; the limited budget 
and "soft measure" character w ould, however, limit their impact. 
Option 4, with its bigger budget, can offer a greater added value; compulsory accompanying 
measures would strengthen its effect. 
An EU SFS is not a panacea for low fruit and ve getable consumption by children or the related 
health problems. Option 4 would contribute to combating these problems,  with a potentially 
significant multiplier effect. 
• Impact on stakeholders 
Options 2, 3 and 4 represent an improvement as compared with the status quo , even if the 
scale of improvement differs significantly between them. 
Taxpayers should benefit from the expected re duction of national health expenditure that 
should be seen in the years following implementation of the scheme.  
7. M ONITORING AND EVALUATION (POINT 11) 
It is anticipated that minimum evaluation standards for Member States would be included in 
the implementing rules of a possible Council Regulation for a SFS.  
8. C ONCLUSIONS (POINT 12) 
To achieve the goal of increas ed consumption, a more intensive use of existing Commission 
instruments is possible and would be a positive step. This applies, in particular, to communication activities under Options 2 and 3 based on the information and promotion 
measures for agricultural products. 
Option 4 is the most effective way of achieving  the objectives of increasing consumption and 
improving health, if its implementation strictly respects the subsidiarity principle and national 
competences, in particular on health and educa tion. Its effectiveness w ould be increased if 
complemented by Options 2 and 3. 
In this context it is proposed to set up a School Fruit Scheme which, for maximum 
effectiveness, brings together  the 3 options in a mutually  supportive package. It would 
comprise the following elements: 
– free distribution of fruits and vegetables  in schools. Community aid should be 
granted to co-finance the supply of fruit and vegetables to pupils of the 6-10 core age 
group in educational es tablishments (schools), the re lated logistics and monitoring 
and evaluation. For this purpose, it is propos ed to provide for a budgetary allocation 
of a total amount of EUR 90 million under T itle I of Council Regulation (EC) No 
1234/2007. It would allow for the extension of  existing SFS in some Member States, 
and the establishment of programmes in MS  without such programmes, often due to 
limited budgetary means.  The Community co-financing rate would be at the level of 50% and 75% in 
convergence regions; 
 
EN 8   EN – accompanying measures . An obligation for Member States to develop a national 
strategy in consultation with public health  and education authorities, industry and 
interested stakeholders. The strategy s hould lay down in which manner a School Fruit 
Scheme could be best implemented and integr ated into the school curriculum. As part 
of the implementation it would be an oblig ation to highlight the EU involvement. The 
accompanying measures would primarily be nationally financed; 
– networking activities , in order to motivate the exchange of information and 
knowledge among SFS actors and stimulate public awareness (as presented in 
Option 2 "networking"). This allocation should amount to €1.3 million; 
– promotion of agricultural products , which could be supported in the framework of 
the EU promotion of agricultural produc ts (as presented in Option 3 "supporting 
initiatives"). In particular, MS could use this framework to ca rry out the necessary 
accompanying measures aimed ad raising awar eness on the beneficial  effects of fruit 
and vegetables consumption. The recent fruit and vegetables reform increased the indicative budget for the promotion of these products by €6 million; 
– monitoring and evaluation . With the purpose of establishing solid data for further 
research on the effectiveness of a School Fruit Scheme in its  different variants and for 
the exchange of "best practices", monitori ng and evaluation should form an integral 
part of an EU scheme.  
All schemes would consequently  include the three elements: 
• the free distribution of fruit and vegetables in educational establishments (schools), 
• a series of accompanying measures, 
• monitoring and evaluation. 
Option 4 entails a significant budgetary cost, both  for the EU and the Member States. For the 
SFS to be effective and efficient, products should  be distributed free of charge to the core 
target group (all children between 6 and 10) for a sufficient number of weeks over a long 
enough period. 
A total annual budget of €156 million is need ed. Experience will show if this budget is 
appropriate to achieve the set objectives. The EU  participation of €90 M w ould have to fit into 
the agricultural financial perspectives.