Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Indicators for the integration of environmental concerns into the common agricultural policy
Date: 2000-01-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common agricultural policy, data collection, environmental protection, sustainable development

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 26.01.2000xxx
COM(2000) 20 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Indicators for the Integration of Environmental Concerns
into the Common Agricultural Policy

PREFACE

The European Council at Cardiff in June 1998 invited all relevant formations of the Council
to establish their own strategies for giving effect to environmental integration and sustainable
development within their respective policy areas. It invited among others the Agriculture
Council to start this process.

The European Council in Vienna in December 1998 reaffirmed the commitment to integrate
the environment and sustainable development into all Community policies. It requested the
Commission to provide a co-ordinated report on indicators. The Agriculture Council was
invited to continue its work with a view to submitting a comprehensive strategy, including a
timetable for further measures and a set of indicators, to the Helsinki European Council. The
Agricultural Council requested in July 1999 a report on agri-environmental indicators from
the Commission.

As presented in COM(1999) 22 “Directions towards Sustainable Agriculture”, the reforms
undertaken as part of Agenda 2000 provide a powerful impetus for the integration of
environmental concerns into agriculture policy. The Commission, Member States,
local
authorities and agricultural and rural communities now have a considerable range of
instruments at their disposal to achieve sustainable agriculture.

Appropriately developed agri-environmental
in
improving transparency, accountability and ensuring the success of monitoring, control and
evaluation. This will contribute significantly to the effectiveness of policy implementation
and will feed into Global Assessment processes.

indicators will be particularly important

However, if these indicators are to be meaningful, they must give a sufficiently accurate
picture of the underlying processes and relationships that link human activities with the
environment. This is particularly the case for agriculture where the relationship is highly
complex and where farming itself involves a range of biophysical and site specific processes.
An indicator framework for agricultural policy therefore needs to reflect the sector’s specific
characteristics.

At present, a partial set of indicators can be established to monitor the integration of
environmental concerns into the CAP. This set will evolve as the indicators are improved and
completed. They are mainly based on the indicator work developed within the OECD
supported by work undertaken by Eurostat, the European Environment Agency, the Joint
Research Centre and the ELISA research project. In principle, many of these indicators could
be operational in the short to medium term, dependent on the adequate collection of data at a
sub-national level. There are, however, areas such as farm management, habitat, landscapes
and biodiversity for which the definition of operational indicators remains a major challenge.

A number of key actions need to be undertaken to ensure that the potential of indicators is
fully exploited. These involve improving existing indicators as well as extending the set to
fully cover sustainable development, improving information collection capacities, developing
approaches to environmental efficiency and the classification of agri-ecosystems, developing
methods to estimate the wider international impacts of the CAP as well as reinforcing
communication on agri-environmental issues.

A priority over the coming years will be the further development,
implementation and
monitoring of the sectoral integration strategy developed by the Agricultural Council. A
framework for further development is proposed.

2

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Indicators for the Integration of Environmental Concerns
into the Common Agricultural Policy

CONTENTS

1.

The policy context for agri-environmental indicators ................................................... 4

1.1. Environmental Integration...................................................................................... 4

1.2.

Practical implementation of policies: Sound and Efficient Management ................. 5

1.3. CAP Reform: Towards Sustainable Agriculture...................................................... 5

1.4. Assessing the integration of environmental concerns into the CAP ......................... 8

2.

Developing indicators for agricultural and rural policies............................................... 9

2.1. The specificities of agriculture ............................................................................... 9

2.2. The context of agricultural activity ......................................................................... 9

2.3. Agricultural activity as a biophysical activity ....................................................... 10

2.4. Beneficial and harmful environmental processes .................................................. 10

2.5.

Site specificity...................................................................................................... 11

2.6. Aggregation and diversity in addressing global impacts........................................ 12

2.7. An indicator framework for agriculture ................................................................ 12

3.

Current work on agri-environmental indicators .......................................................... 13

3.1. The implementation of agricultural and rural policies ........................................... 14

3.2. Agri-environmental indicators in development ..................................................... 14

3.3. Gaps and challenges ............................................................................................. 16

3.4. Monitoring the integration strategy for the Agricultural Sector............................. 20

4.

Next steps .................................................................................................................. 21

4.1.

Further development of the indicator set............................................................... 22

4.2. A long-term strategy on data information needs.................................................... 21

4.3. Developing Environmental Efficiency Indicators ................................................. 23

4.4. Using landscape to classify European Agri-ecosystems ........................................ 23

4.5. Bringing agri-environmental concerns closer to the citizen................................... 24

4.6. Developing Specific Headline Indicators for Agriculture...................................... 24

4.7. Timetable ............................................................................................................. 25

3

1.

THE POLICY CONTEXT FOR AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS

1.1.

Environmental Integration

1.1.1.

Treaty of Amsterdam

The Amsterdam Treaty reinforces sustainable development as an objective of the
EU, while retaining the existing Treaty bases for environmental and agricultural
policy. It highlights the need to integrate environmental protection requirements into
the definition and implementation of all Community policies. Agriculture remains a
Community policy where the instruments of the CAP are decided by the Council of
Ministers. This enables environmental considerations to be developed, enacted and
applied throughout the EU.

1.1.2.

The mandate from Cardiff and Vienna

The European Council at Cardiff in June 1998 endorsed the principle that major
policy proposals by the Commission should be accompanied by an appraisal of their
environmental impact. It noted the Commission’s efforts to integrate environmental
concerns in all Community policies and the need to evaluate the level of integration
in individual decisions, including AGENDA 2000. It invited all relevant formations of
the Council to establish their own strategies for giving effect to environmental
integration and sustainable development within their respective policy areas. It
invited among others the Agriculture Council to start this process.

The European Council in Vienna in December 1998 reaffirmed the commitment to
integrate the environment and sustainable development into all Community policies.
It requested the Commission to provide a co-ordinated report on indicators. The
Agriculture Council was invited to continue its work with a view to submitting a
comprehensive strategy, including a timetable for further measures and a set of
indicators, to the Helsinki European Council. The Agricultural Council requested in
July 1999 a report on agri-environmental indicators from the Commission to support
the preparations of the European Council.

1.1.3.

Agricultural Council Integration Strategy

The Strategy adopted in November 1999 responds to the request of the Vienna
Council to address the integration of environmental requirements into the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP) through the reforms under Agenda 2000. The measures
set out encompass environmental requirements and incentives integrated into the
market policy as well as targeted environmental measures forming part of the Rural
Development Programmes. The Strategy sets objectives for water, agro-chemicals,
land use and soil, climate change and air quality, as well as landscape and
biodiversity. It is stressed that achieving sustainable agriculture will depend on the
implementation of the available measures by Member States. The need for rigorous
monitoring and evaluation of integration, based on meaningful environmental
indicators is underlined.

4

1.2.

Practical implementation of policies: Sound and Efficient Management

Over the past few years the Commission in partnership with Member States has
sought
to improve the implementation and control of EU programmes and
expenditure. This has been undertaken in the context of the SEM 2000 initiative and
has been an integral part of the reform proposals presented in the context of Agenda
2000. Reinforced control, monitoring and evaluation will accompany greater
subsidiarity and decentralisation of responsibilities. Such improvements also reflect a
need to improve the accountability of EU policies to the budgetary authority and to
EU citizens and their representatives.

Agenda 2000 clarifies the respective roles of the Commission, Member States and
other bodies in the implementation of Agricultural and Rural Development policies.
A greater role is given to Member States to tailor policies to the needs of their
agriculture and rural areas principally through Regulation (EC) No 1259/99 on the
establishment of common rules for direct support schemes under the Common
Agricultural Policy - and Regulation (EC) No 1257/99 on support
rural
development. These two regulations, in particular, provide for reinforced monitoring
and reporting requirements.

for

As regards evaluation, new conditions apply to CAP expenditure. Common rules
applying to all direct payments have been laid down, including the evaluation of
Common Market Organisations. The quantification of
rural development
programmes has been reinforced in order to ensure effective evaluation on an ex-
ante, mid-term and ex-post basis. An assessment of the environmental impact of
these policies will form an important element of evaluation. The Commission will
provide a Community level synthesis of both the mid-term and ex-post evaluations.

Appropriately developed agri-environmental indicators will be particularly important
in improving transparency, accountability and ensuring the success of monitoring,
control and evaluation. This will contribute significantly to the effectiveness of
policy implementation and feed Global Assessment processes.

1.3.

CAP Reform: Towards Sustainable Agriculture1

1.3.1.

The integration of environmental concerns and requirements into the CAP

1.3.1.1. The interaction between agriculture and the environment

Historically, agriculture has shaped many European landscapes over centuries. This
has given rise to unique semi-natural environments with a rich variety of habitats and
species dependent on the continuation of
farming. However, as commercial
activities, agriculture and forestry are aimed primarily at production and rely on the
availability of natural resources. Increasingly,
the development of commercial
activities has brought new environmental pressures to bear on the natural capital
stock. Technological progress and the desire to maximise returns and minimise costs
have produced a marked intensification in agriculture over the last 40 years.

Intensification can lead to degradation of soil, water and air. During recent decades
awareness has grown that differentiated landscapes and related biodiversity are also

1

“Directions toward Sustainable Agriculture” COM(1999) 22.

5

threatened by the intensification of agriculture. On the other hand, they are also
increasingly threatened by marginalisation and abandonment of agricultural land use
due to economic forces. These differing challenges posed by intensification and
abandonment of farming highlight
the complexity of the relationship between
agriculture and the environment.

1.3.1.2. Sustainable agriculture

The desired relationship between agriculture and environment can be captured by the
the 5th
term „sustainable agriculture“. Sustainability is the key concept of
Environmental Action Programme, which refers to sustainable development as
„development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own needs“. This entails preserving the overall
balance and value of the natural capital stock and taking a long-term view of the real
socio-economic costs and benefits of consumption and conservation.

At a first level, “sustainable agriculture“ involves managing natural resources in a
way which ensures that they are available in the future. This narrow definition of
sustainability in many cases reflects the economic self-interest of farmers.

A broader understanding of sustainability extends, however,
to a larger set of
features linked to land and land use such as the protection of landscapes, habitats,
and biodiversity, and to objectives such as the quality of drinking water and air. In
this broader perspective, the use of land and natural resources for agricultural
production must take account of the protection of the environment and cultural
heritage.

Finally, sustainability needs also to reflect society’s concerns as regards the social
function of agriculture, the maintenance of the viability of rural communities and a
balanced pattern of development.

Sustainable agriculture therefore needs to reflect productive, environmental and
social functions. This document restricts itself, in line with the mandate from the
Council, to the indicators necessary to assess the role of this environmental function
within agriculture. Further work will need to be undertaken to provide a full set of
indicators. This should be completed with the development of appropriate indicators
to measure environmental efficiency.

1.3.1.3. Principles governing agri-environmental policies

It is the complexity of the relationship between agriculture and the environment –
harmful and beneficial processes, diversity of local conditions and production
systems – that has conditioned the approach to environmental integration in the
context of the CAP. Central to understanding this relationship is the principle of
“good farming practice”, corresponding to the type of farming which a reasonable
farmer would follow in the region concerned. On this basis:

– As a minimum,

farmers should respect general

requirements as regards
environmental care without specific payment. This means that all farmers should
follow compulsory laws in relation to pesticide use, to fertiliser application, water
use and where appropriate, national or regional guidelines on good farming
practice.

6

– However, wherever society asks farmers to pursue environmental objectives
beyond good farming practice, and the farmer incurs a cost or foregoes income as
a result, then society must expect to pay for that environmental service.

This approach is based on the Polluter-Pays-Principle. Accordingly, farmers bear
compliance costs up to a reference level of "good farming practice" reflected in
property rights. However, in rural areas environmental objectives are often more
ambitious than “good farming practice". In such cases, environmental objectives will
be achieved only if appropriately remunerated. It is therefore appropriate to pay
farmers to preserve the environment through privately owned resources or factors of
production, provided that this goes beyond good farming practice.

1.3.1.4. CAP Reform

The reforms undertaken as part of the Agenda 2000 package represent a significant
step forward in putting this approach into practice. In the Common Rules Regulation,
Member States are required to take measures necessary for the protection of the
environment. Three courses of action are included in this Regulation. First, to apply
compulsory restrictions. Such measures are already required in Member States in
relation, for example, to pollution by nitrates in water. Secondly, Member States may
apply cross-compliance, by attaching specific environmental conditions to the
granting of direct CAP payments. Thirdly, Member States may use agri-environment
programmes to protect or enhance the environment beyond good farming practice.
Furthermore, while the CAP is a common European policy, Agenda 2000 recognises
that the diverse nature of the farmed environment across Europe means that the
policy has to be applied in a decentralised way.

The application of these measures by Member States should therefore enable them to
improve the balance between agriculture and the environment. This would eliminate
damaging features of agriculture and improve its performance as a sector in harmony
with the environment. Society in general, although prepared to take into account
legitimate social and economic interests, will not accept that CAP funding leads to
environmental degradation whose costs it, in turn, would have to bear. It will be,
nevertheless, necessary to carefully monitor and analyse developments in all
agricultural sectors irrespective of the level of CAP intervention.

With regard to the sectors covered by Agenda 2000 the Berlin Summit foresees
certain reports or mid-term reviews within the next five years: arable crops, the milk
quota system, oilseeds, the budget situation. Any legislative proposals arising from
these reviews will require an appropriate environmental appraisal. Sectors not
covered by Agenda 2000 and scheduled to be revised will be subject
to
environmental appraisal.

Agenda 2000 has made a strong effort
the most apparent negative
environmental effects of the old CAP by providing member states with a range of
instruments. A main task for the future will be to monitor and evaluate the
implementation of these instruments and their effectiveness.

to correct

1.3.2.

Issues for the future: environment and trade, consumer concerns, enlargement

The fundamental basis of the European model lies in the multifunctional nature of
Europe’s agriculture and the part it plays in the economy and the environment, in

7

society and in preserving the landscape. This creates a specific need to maintain
farming throughout Europe and to safeguard farmers’ incomes.

The Agenda 2000 agricultural reforms are considered to constitute essential elements
in defining the Commission’s negotiation mandate for the next World Trade
Organisation round. The EU will need to work in these negotiations in order to both
safeguard the European model and benefit from opportunities on international
markets. In particular, it will be important to safeguard the ability of those employed
in agriculture to supply public goods, in particular as regards the environment and
the sustained vitality of rural areas. At the same time, it will necessary to fully meet
international commitments under Multilateral Environmental Agreements and to take
into account the legitimate concerns of developing countries. Indicators could a play
a potentially important role in developing appropriate strategies in areas such as
climate change.

A robust and consistent system of agri-environmental indicators will contribute to the
detection of environmental problems and will help the European Union explain to its
citizens what
is doing and what remains to be done to promote sustainable
agriculture in Europe and at an international level. They will also help the EU’s trade
partners understand the importance Europe attaches to the environmental function of
its agriculture.

it

Increased consumer concerns about safety, origin and quality of agricultural products
can be partly addressed by improved information and transparency about farming
practices. Once again, this will also be particularly important in an international
context over the coming years.

Finally, enlargement will bring particular challenges for agri-environmental policy.
A clearer picture of sustainable (and unsustainable) practices in the Union as well as
a corresponding set of indicators will help acceding countries adapt to the Acquis. It
should not be forgotten that Central and Eastern Europe contains many areas of
remarkable high nature value that could be threatened by land abandonment or the
unregulated intensification of agriculture. Similar indirect environmental effects of
the CAP in countries where the EU has economic or development co-operation
agreements should also be taken into account.

1.4.

Assessing the integration of environmental concerns into the CAP

The reforms undertaken as part of Agenda 2000 provide a powerful impetus for the
integration of environmental concerns into agriculture policy. The Commission,
Member States, local authorities and agricultural and rural communities now have a
considerable range of instruments at their disposal to achieve sustainable agriculture.
Appropriate agri-environmental indicators can help to provide information to those
involved in the development and implementation of these policies. Indicators need to
meet at least five criteria. They should enable those who implement and make policy
as well as the broader public:

– to identify the key agri-environmental issues that are of concern in Europe today,

– to understand, monitor and evaluate the relationship between agricultural practices

and their beneficial and harmful environmental effects,

8

– to assess the extent to which agricultural policies respond to the need to promote
environmentally friendly agriculture and to communicate this to policymakers and
the wider public,

– to monitor and evaluate the site specific environmental contribution of

Community programmes to sustainable agriculture,

– to map the diversity of agri-ecosystems in the European Union and Candidate
Countries. This has particular relevance in explaining to the EU’s trading partners
the specificity of the farmed environment in Europe.

2.

DEVELOPING INDICATORS FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL POLICIES

2.1.

The specificities of agriculture

the complex chain of cause and effect.

The Councils in Cardiff and Vienna underlined the importance of developing
environmental integration indicators to support the sectoral Council strategies The
purpose of environmental integration indicators is to help assess the extent to which
environmental concerns have been integrated into sectoral policies. To do this they
must operate at a range of levels - policy, human activity and the environment – and
reflect
Information about actual
environmental damage and its economic valuation need to be supplemented with
analysis of causality and the sector’s contribution to the problem. This will ensure a
balanced evaluation of the effectiveness of current policy instruments both within
and outside the sector. Only in this way can data about human activities in given
sectors and the state of the environment be transformed into policy decision
supporting information.

Such indicators should therefore help achieve a better understanding of the complex
issues in the domain of agriculture and environment, to show developments over
time, and to provide quantitative information. All of these are needed for targeting
and monitoring. However, if these indicators are to be meaningful, they must give a
sufficiently accurate picture of the underlying processes and relationships that link
human activities with the environment. This is particularly the case for agriculture
where the relationship is highly complex and where farming itself involves a range of
biophysical and site specific processes.

2.2.

The context of agricultural activity

Unlike many other sectors, agriculture is one in which direct public intervention
remains the norm rather than the exception. This makes farming activity particular
sensitive to changes in public policy. Farmers’ decisions are heavily influenced by
market support, direct payments, agri-environmental policy and environmental
legislation. These decisions may be further shaped by water, energy or planning
policies.

However, recent reforms of the CAP have encouraged greater market orientation
among farmers, particularly through reductions in price support and development of
niche markets and higher value added products. Production and farm management
decisions are increasingly sensitive to changes in input and product price signals.

9

Furthermore, the sector has experienced rapid, if geographically uneven, changes in
technology and skills level since the late 1950s. Since these changes have also
characterised agriculture in those developed countries outside Europe which have
traditionally supported their
a great deal of agricultural
intensification would have occurred even in the absence of the CAP.

agriculture

less,

Consumer and producer attitudes are increasingly shaping agricultural practices.
These attitudinal changes have an important
influence on the ways in which
responses to environmental concerns are developed, for example in the development
of environmental services and markets for organic produce.

Better farming practices play an important role in improving food safety and food
quality for consumers. Together they can contribute to better health for farmers,
workers and consumers.

The broad range of contextual factors reveal the role and limits of policy in shaping
agricultural activities and related environmental effects resulting from CAP
measures. Understanding the importance of market developments,
technological
progress or attitudinal change will enable policy to be targeted there where it is most
effective.

A further feature of agriculture in the European Union is that it is covered by a
common policy in which environmental requirements are specifically integrated. An
environmental policy response is now internal to the CAP; the key issue is now to
assess its scope and effectiveness.

2.3.

Agricultural activity as a biophysical activity

A second specificity of agriculture is that by its biophysical nature it is part of, rather
than external to, local ecosystems. Of course, in seeking to turn nature to agricultural
production a range of external elements are introduced to the system, natural
resources are used or consumed and new physical or biological elements produced.
Relatively detailed information is needed to characterise input use (chemicals, energy
and water), land use/cover (topology, cropping and livestock practices) and farm
management. In many cases, sustainable agriculture is the product of the right mix of
input, land use and farm management practices appropriate to local conditions.

While detailed specification of farming practices helps to understand the processes
driving the sustainability of agriculture, the sheer diversity of farming practices and
local conditions are difficult to capture at an aggregate level. For this reason, it is
particularly important to develop indicators that capture the key trends in farming
activity:
specialisation-
diversification, marginalisation-concentration. These need to be available at a range
of geographical levels in order to identify both broad national trends as well as
localised concentrations of practices. This
indicators would help
policymakers and the public better understand the shape and characteristics of the
agricultural sector from an environmental point of view.

intensification-extensification,

expansion-withdrawal,

type of

2.4.

Beneficial and harmful environmental processes

The relationship between environment and agriculture is a particular one and the
nature of effects is distinct from other economic sectors. Agriculture is by far the

10

biggest user of land. On the one hand, some farming systems exert harmful pressures
on the environment and food safety, for example the build up of nutrients and
pesticides in soil and water, soil compaction and erosion or the excessive abstraction
of water for irrigation. However, in Europe, much of the valued rural environment is
the product of agriculture and is dependent on it: appropriate farming systems help to
preserve landscapes and habitats as well as a range of conditions favourable to
beneficial environmental processes. Some of these processes can be summarised
below:

Relationship

Processes

Pollution of environment

Buildup of nitrate and other mineral residues, pesticide
residues, salination, ammonia and methane emissions

Depletion of
environmental resources

Inappropriate use of water and soil, destruction of semi-
natural and natural land cover.

Preservation and
Enhancement of the
environment

Creation/preservation of landscapes, habitats, landcover,
agriculture,
diversity
preservation
production of renewable energy sources

genetic

of

in

The potential for certain types of agricultural activity to make a significant
contribution to environmental objectives should not be underestimated, particularly
within a favourable policy context. The production of biofuels can, for example,
make an important contribution to combating climate change.

Developing indicators that reflect both the beneficial and harmful effects of
agriculture is a key element in defining an operational framework for sustainable
agriculture.

2.5.

Site specificity

For the monitoring of rural policies and agri-environmental programmes, indicators
to be
have to reflect site-specific features and programme criteria in order
meaningful. Less site-specific indicators, which are more readily available, tell little
about effects in local areas.
to disclose significant
Indeed,
developments at a local or regional level.

they may fail

Developing environmental indicators relating to agriculture requires a differentiated
approach, reflecting regional differences in economic structures and differences in
natural conditions. The available data, often highly aggregated may provide some
valuable insights, but can also be misleading for some areas such as biodiversity or
water quality due to a lack of regional differentiation.

A site-specific approach is necessary. First, it offers an accurate picture of the state
of the environment
in a given area and the effects of local farming activities.
Secondly, it is, in principle, the level at which agri-environmental policies define
good farming practice and therefore offers natural synergies between programmes
and other environmental policies. Effective evaluation will depend on an appropriate
focus at this level. Thirdly, the impact of many polluting, depleting or beneficial
processes will depend on site specific characteristics such as geology, topography or
climate. Finally, a site-specific approach enables us to look at ecosystems in a
holistic way and address systemic characteristics such as quality and vulnerability.

11

A meaningful systemic context of agri-environmental indicators can be provided by
the concept of “landscape” as the cultivated, partly semi-natural space within which
agricultural production takes place and which is characterised by the totality of its
biophysical,
landscape
characterisation has the potential to bring together a broad range of site specific
features in a coherent manner.

features. This

geophysical

cultural

type

and

of

2.6.

Aggregation and diversity in addressing global impacts

While a certain amount of information concerning the impact of agriculture on
natural resources exists at a national and EU level, much of this is based on estimates
and macro-modelling rather than the aggregation of local information. A much
clearer link needs to be built between local and global levels. This is particularly
important, if agriculture is to be correctly placed within the overall pollution context
and its interaction with the economy as a whole.

There are particular difficulties as regards biodiversity, habitats and landscapes
where,
in addition to the global stock of species or natural habitats, we are
particularly interested in differentiation and diversity. Europeans are attached to rural
areas not only because they have aesthetically pleasing landscapes and rich flora and
fauna, but also because they are highly differentiated with great species diversity.
Farming plays an important role in maintaining this differentiation.

Global impacts need to therefore reflect both the cumulative and differentiated
effects of aggregating the environmental state of specific sites. In this respect,
landscape (as defined above) can play an important role in classifying differentiated
European ecosystems. By taking into account issues of vulnerability and quality it
also permits a spatial understanding of areas at environmental risk across the EU.

2.7.

An indicator framework for agriculture

The OECD's DSR2 framework and the European Environment Agency's DPSIR3
framework, both of which contain some degree of flexibility to allow adaptation to
specific sectors, provide the basis for an agri-environmental indicator framework.

At the centre of the framework is the current state of the agricultural environment
and how this has changed over time. State indicators bring to the fore any
undesirable changes which need to be combated, (for example, nitrate or pesticide
concentrations in water) as well as particularly desirable states which should be
preserved (for example, many agricultural landscapes or valuable habitats).

The second step is to identify the pressures which have brought about undesirable
change and environmental benefits resulting from farming which have helped to
preserve or enhance the environment. These have, respectively, a negative and
positive impact on the environment.

The third step is to link these pressures and processes to the driving forces in the
economy (farmers' activities, which are themselves driven by market forces), as it is

2

3

Driving force-State-Response
Driving force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response

12

these driving forces that are directly influenced by agricultural policy, and it is here
where the integration process is applied.

Finally, it is necessary to monitor how society's response to these issues is working.
Are agri-environmental measures having the desired effect, are they responding
quickly enough, or are they producing unforeseen problems?

This framework allows the relevant questions to be posed, and the information
needed to answer these questions, i.e. the indicators, to be identified.

DRIVING FORCES:

FARMING PRACTICES

Input Use – Land Use –
Farm Management -
Trends

PRESSURES AND BENEFITS

HARMFUL AND
BENEFICIAL PROCESSES

Pollution –
Resource

RESPONSES

FACTORS INFLUENCING
FARMING PRACTICES

Public policy – Market
signals – Technology and
Skills – Social attitudes

STATE

SITE SPECIFIC

Site Habitat and
Biodiversity – Natural
Resources - Landscape

IMPACT

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

Habitats and Biodiversity
– Natural Resources –
Landscape Diversity

Agricultural DPSIR model

3.

CURRENT WORK ON AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS

A considerable amount of work on indicators has already been undertaken at a
European, national, regional and local level. Much of the most
innovative and
promising developments exist at a national or sub-national level. However, for
reasons of consistency and data collection,
focuses on indicators
developed in co-operation between Member States as well as those available at an
EU level.

this report

13

3.1.

The implementation of agricultural and rural policies

3.1.1. Monitoring

Article 43(1) of the Rural Development Regulation states that rural development
plans shall include « provisions to ensure the effective and correct implementation of
the plans,
the same
including monitoring and evaluation »; Article 48(2) of
Regulation foresees that « monitoring shall be carried out by reference to specific
physical and financial indicators ».

The Commission has presented a set of common indicators to Member States, as well
as a common structure to present such indicators. This will provide a basic level of
harmonised information on the implementation of rural development measures in
Member States/regions – information that can be aggregated to a community level.
The final aim is to obtain a clear indication of the progress of the measures applied in
Member States/regions, which will serve as a basis for the annual progress reports.

The Common Rules Regulation for Direct Support Schemes requires member states
to inform the Commission in detail on the measures taken to implement
the
including cases of non-compliance with environmental requirements.
regulation,
Some work is needed to harmonise this work in order to produce indicators that are
meaningful at an EU level.

3.1.2.

Evaluation

Rural development programmes and payments under the support schemes are subject
to evaluation (ex-ante, mid-term and ex-post) designed to appraise their impact. The
latter will take account of the need to better integrate the environment into the
common market organisations.

The Commission will provide guidance and establish with Member States
appropriate indicators to assess the effectiveness of these programmes and policies
focusing on results and impact.

3.2.

Agri-environmental indicators in development

3.2.1. OECD

Considerable work has been undertaken in the OECD. This has been possible due
largely to input from Member States and the Commission Services. Thirteen
indicator subject areas have been identified: nutrients, pesticides, water use, land use
and conservation, soil quality, water quality, greenhouse gases, biodiversity, wildlife
habitats, agricultural landscapes, farm management, farm financial resources, socio-
cultural issues. In addition, a further set of contextual indicators covering land cover
and land use has been developed.

Under these subject areas, about thirty actual indicators have been selected for short-
term development while more than twenty indicators will need further refinement in
a medium/longer term. The OECD has developed its own database but most of the
indicators developed will rely on existing figures at national level or new uncollected
data. For three indicator areas (nutrients, pesticides, green house gases),
is
considered that data collection and indicator measurement are already well advanced

it

14

and being refined. The other areas, which were extensively discussed in a workshop
in York in September 1998, still require further development.

The OECD Secretariat intends to request OECD countries on an ad hoc basis to
provide the appropriate missing data. This will be facilitated through a regularly
circulated and updated questionnaire.

3.2.2.

EUROSTAT

As the official statistical office of the EU, the main focus of Eurostat's work is to
provide the basic statistical information required by the Commission. Therefore, for
many years now Eurostat has collected basic statistics on agriculture, and manages 3
main agricultural themes: the Farm Structure Survey, livestock and crop production
data (including agricultural
land use data) and the Economic Accounts for
Agriculture, including prices. Additional data on agriculture is available from the
FADN4 managed by DG Agriculture.

The current work programme for environment statistics and indicators, based on the
5th Environment Action Programme, includes development of the environmental
aspects of agriculture. A first step has been to use as far as possible existing
agriculture statistics and surveys, and other readily available data. Priority areas have
been nutrient balances and pesticide use, where methodologies are being developed
and data sources explored.

A first attempt to bring together all the available data has resulted in the publication
“Agriculture, Environment, Rural Development: Facts and Figures.”5 Issues covered
include
specialisation,
intensification, concentration, non-food crops, organic farming, agri-environmental
measures, Natura 2000,
forestry, water, nitrogen, pesticides, climate change,
acidification, landscape, soil and rural development.

and employment

crop trends,

dynamics,

economic

Moreover, following the Communication from the Commission to the Council on
Environmental Indicators and Green Accounting6, Eurostat has identified the main
pressures on the environment from human activities and the indicators needed to
describe these pressures. The first results, 60 pressure indicators (some of which are
directly relevant to agriculture) covering ten policy fields, were published in 1999.
The second edition of this publication (due in 2000) will look more closely at the
contribution of the various sectors, among which agriculture, to the pressures.

to advance agri-
Eurostat has organised several
environmental work. The most recent, held in Copenhagen in July 1999,
in
collaboration with Danmark Statistics, aimed at improving knowledge of ongoing
work in national statistical offices, agricultural ministries, EEA, and the Commission
Services.

seminars and workshops

On the basis of the CORINE land cover database different Commission Services
have undertaken work to develop a land cover diversity indicator. This has included

4

5

6

Farm Accountancy Data Network
European Commission, 1999
COM(94)670 final

15

data collection and processing methodologies in order to operationalise the indicator
and analysis of its evolution over time7.

3.2.3.

The European Environment Agency

Priority issues for the EEA are: emissions, waste, nature protection, air quality,
water, marine and coastal zones, soils, land cover, chemicals, noise,
impact on
health. The EEA has not worked specifically on agri-environmental indicators, even
though much of its work on indicators can be applied to this area.

The Agency regularly produces an analytical state of the environment report, and in
1999 will produce its first annual indicator report. Within the yearly indicator report,
agriculture is dealt with within a sectoral chapter in which seven different indicators
are developed and assessed. These rely mostly on available data and are related to
macro-questions.

The European Topic Centres (ETCs) of the EEA on soil, nature, biodiversity, water,
waste and landcover provide a good starting point for the further development of a
number of agri-environmental indicators. The ETC for Nature Conservation of the
EEA is currently developing an EU nature information system (EUNIS). A habitat
classification is being developed under this framework, as a successor to the
CORINE habitat classification.

3.2.4.

Indicator work in the context of EU Research Programmes

A considerable amount of research has been undertaken in the framework of the
EU’s AIR and FAIR programmes into the relationship between agriculture and the
environment. The ELISA8 concerted action, led by the European Centre for Nature
Conservation, seeks to improve the territorial coherence of work emerging out of the
OECD. ELISA identified 22 state indicators related to soil, water, air as well as bio-
diversity and landscape. Agricultural practices (such as pesticides application,
nutrient discharge, land use intensity) with their potential effects were described by
12 pressure indicators. Emphasis was also placed on the linkages between state and
pressure indicators.

A targeted area of the ELISA work is landscape. Preliminary findings stress the need
for a clear distinction between indicators for assessing driving forces (agricultural
land uses practices and rural processes) and policy-relevant landscape functions. The
complexity of driving forces as well as landscape functions is likely to require the
need for developing « composite » indicators that combine a set of assessment
criteria. Four main indicators to assess the environmental state were retained
(biophysical adequateness of land use, openess versus closedness, adequateness of
key cultural features and land recognised for its scenic or scientific value).

7

8

Publication of the results of the work (DG Agriculture/Eurostat/JRC/EEA) is envisaged for early 2000.
Environmental Indicators for Sustainable Agriculture in the EU (FAIR-CT97-3446)

16

3.3.

Gaps and challenges

3.3.1. Coverage of agri-environmental issues in current work on indicators

While considerable work has been undertaken in the development of indicators,
the
many gaps still remain. These gaps exist at a number of levels in data,
construction of indicators, but above all in the existence of appropriate indicators that
reflect key policy issues. It is therefore necessary to compare the “policy” coverage
of existing indicator work with the key issues and questions highlighted above.

least at national

The table below summarises the coverage of agri-environmental indicators in various
level9. The indicators are
fora for which data is available at
structured in relation to the agricultural DPSIR framework presented above.
Considerable information relevant to the development of indicators is expected to be
generated through rural development programmes. However, this information will be
territorially differentiated both by programme area and coverage of agri-
environmental measures. It will, nevertheless, provide a rich source of information
about the beneficial effects of agricultural practices.

OECD
stocktaking
report

EEA (1999
indicator
report)

Eurostat
Pressure
Indicators

(Eurostat)
Joint
Publication

All sectors

RDP –
monitoring
and
evaluation
possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

possible

Factors and
responses
influencing
farming
practices.

Characteristics
of farming
practices

Harmful and
beneficial
processes

Site specific
state

Global impact

Public
policy
Market
signals
Technology
and skills
Attitudes

Input Use

Land use

Manage-
ment
Trends

Pollution

Resource
depletion
Benefits

Habitats/
biodiversity
Natural
resources
Landscape

Habitats/
biodiversity
Natural
resources
Landscape
diversity

Good policy
coverage

Weak policy
coverage

No coverage

9

This table is based on the survey of current indicator work presented in the Working Paper of the
Commission Services “Current Agri-environmental Indicators at EU level”. This table should only be
taken as a broad picture of the current state of play since it only takes into account published work.

17

It is clear that weaknesses remain at a considerable number of levels. These are
particularly prominent at the level of harmful and beneficial processes and site
specific states. Further work is required on the diversity of European agri-
ecosystems.

3.3.2.

Indicators for assessing environmental integration

At present, a partial set of indicators can be established to monitor the integration of
environmental concerns into agricultural policy. This set will evolve as the indicators
are improved and completed. This table below presents indicators that reflect
particularly well the main concerns arising from the relationship between agriculture
and the environment. They are mainly based on the indicator work developed within
the OECD supported by work undertaken by EUROSTAT, the EEA, and the JRC. In
principle, all these indicators chould be operational in the short to medium term,
dependent on the adequate collection of data at a sub-national
level. Data
requirements are presented in the fourth column of the table:

18

Factors and
responses
influencing
farming
practices.

Characteris
tics of
farming
practices

Harmful
and
beneficial
processes
of
agriculture
?

Indicators

Data requirements

Key tasks

Public policy

Area covered by AEP

Regional levels of good farming practice

Regional levels for environmental targets

Area under nature conservation

Market signals

Organic producer price premium

Technology and
skills

Holder’s training levels

Attitudes

Area of organic farming

Input Use

Average consumption of N and P fertilisers

Consumption of pesticides

Water use intensity

Energy use

Land use

Topological change

Cropping/livestock patterns

Management

*

Aggregation of local data

Available in
programmes and
member state
reporting on cross
compliance.

Sub-national data
required.

Sub-national data
required.

Sub-national data
required

Collection of data on active
ingredients per crop

Completion of pesticide risk
classification

Need to develop indicators

Need to integrate EUROFARM
and CORINE

Trends

Intensification/extensification/specialisation/
diversication/marginalisation

Need to develop clearly defined
indicators and appropriate indices

Pollution

Soil surface nitrogen balance

Resource
depletion

CH4 emissions

Pesticide soil contamination

Water contamination (directives/monitoring)

Groundwater abstraction and Water stress

Soil erosion

Land cover destruction

Introduction of low genetic diversity species

Sub-national data
required

Pesticide soil contamination
indicator needs further
development

Sub-national data
required

For water, data is
needed for river
basins.

Co-ordination with Water
Framework Directive

Composite land cover indicator
required.

Benefits

*Area of high nature value grassland etc.

Further work required

Site
specific
state

Local habitats/
biodiversity

Natural
resources

Global
impact

Landscape

Habitats and
biodiversity

Natural
resources

Landscape
diversity

Production of renewable energy sources

Species richness (birdlife richness)

Sub-national data
required

Birdlife is a good proxy indicator;
more work is needed on indexes.

Soil quality

Nitrates/pesticides in ground /surface water

Ground water levels

Sub-national data
required

*

*

Share of agriculture in emissions, nitrate
contamination, water use

*

Further work required

Aggregate indicator required

Further development work
required

There are, however, areas in which the definition of operational indicators remains a
major challenge. (marked “*”). This is particularly the case for farm management,
beneficial processes, landscapes, global habitat stock and biodiversity and landscape
diversity. For these, appropriate indicators need to be defined on the basis of the
considerable information that is currently available. Although a large amount of
contextual information on factors and responses influencing farming practices is
available, this needs to be further developed into a more complete set of coherent
indicators. To date, little work has been done concerning the presence of genetically
modified organisms, both as regards voluntary release and long-distance dispersion.

19

In general, scientific models will be necessary to encompass and validate the
in order to foster a comprehensive and shared
information base of indicators,
approach to sustainable agriculture.

3.4.

Monitoring the integration strategy for the Agricultural Sector

task over

A central
the coming years will be the further development,
implementation and monitoring of the sectoral integration strategy developed by the
Agricultural Council. The strategy sets a number of objectives. In assessing progress
to meeting these objectives, it will be important to provide quantified information
that responds to key questions:

– What policy measures are being undertaken to improve the environmental

situation in the agricultural sector?

– What improvements in farming practices are taking place?

–

To what extent have beneficial environmental processes such as habitat
preservation increased and harmful processes such as pollution decreased?

– What is the effect on the state of the environment?

–

To what extent have specific objectives been met?

As regards policy measures and farming practices, the key source of information will
come from the monitoring of rural development, market and environmental policies.
However, this will remain dependent on the coverage of these policies and the
willingness of member states to collect the appropriate information. The indicator set
outlined above could be adapted to reflect the broader concerns of the strategy and its
specific objectives. A monitoring framework for further development is proposed
below.

20

Indicator framework for Agricultural Council Integration Strategy:

Theme

Specific objectives of the
strategy

What policy measures are
being undertaken to improve
the situation?

What improvements in
farming practices are
taking place?

To what extent have
beneficial processes
increased and harmful
processes decreased?

What is the effect on
the state of the
environment?

To what extent have
global objectives been
achieved?

Water

Agro-
chemicals

–

–

–

–

Pollution into ground and
surface water
be
reduced

should

Inappropriate use of water for
irrigation should be reduced

Leaching
and
phosphates should be reduced

nitrates

of

The environmental
pesticide
reduced

use

risks of
be

should

–

Improvement
surface nitrogen balance

in

soil

– Reduction in groundwater

abstraction

– Reduction in water stress

– Reduction in nitrates

–

and pesticides in water

–

Improved groundwater
levels

–

– Reduction in pesticide soil

– Reduction of pesticides

–

contamination

–

in water

Increased
richness

species

–

Land
and soil

use

– Degrading physical, chemical
and biological pressures on the
soil should be reduced

Climate
change

–

Erosion should be reduced,
adequate
systems
farming
should be promoted

– Reduction of CH4, N2O and
other Green House Gases

– Non-food production should

be increased

– Use of renewable energy from
biomass and biofuels should
be promoted

Landscape
and
biodiversity

–

–

Landscapes,
biodiversity
maintained

habitats
should

and
be

of

Preservation
genetic
material of crops and domestic
animals

Monitoring of Rural
Development Programmes;
Market Organisations and
Environmental policies

– Reduction in soil erosion

–

Improved soil quality

–

Improvement
surface nitrogen balance

in

soil

– Reduction in landcover

destruction

– Reduction
emissions

in

CH4

–

in

Increase
produced
renewable resources

energy
from

–

–

–

Landcover destruction

–

Increase
genetic diversity

in agricultural

of

Preservation
high
nature and culture value
landscapes

Preservation
natural habitats

of

semi-

–

Species
(birdlife indicator)

richness

21

Increase in environmental
efficiency of agricultural
water use.

Improvement
agricultural
to water quality.

in
contribution

Increase/preservation
species diversity

of

Improvement
agricultural
to water quality.

in
contribution

environmental
Increase
efficiency of pesticide use

Increase/preservation
habitats
diversity

and

of
species

Increased
efficiency of land use

environmental

–

–

–

– Reduction in contribution
to

agriculture
of
Greenhouse Gases

–

–

–

–

Increase in biofuels as
part
energy
total
consumption

of

Increase
efficiency

environmental

Preservation of landscape
richness and diversity

Preservation/increase
biodiversity

in

4.

NEXT STEPS

A number of key actions need to be undertaken to ensure that the potential of
agri-environmental
indicators is fully exploited. These will be particularly
in ensuring that Council Strategy can be fully monitored and
important
evaluated. These can be summarised under the headings of improving and
operationalising existing indicators, improving information collection capacities,
extending indicator approaches (environmental efficiency and classifying agri-
ecosystems) and finally improving communication on agri-environmental
issues.

4.1.

Further development of the indicator set

The first task to be undertaken is the completion of a set of integration indicators
for agriculture, particularly where indicators are poorly defined or where full
data sets are missing. This should be based on the continuing work of the OECD
and consolidated with work in other European Union bodies. This should be
accompanied by the development of social and economic indicators to provide a
complete picture of sustainable agriculture and, where appropriate, development
of methods and indicators to assess the wider international impacts of the CAP,
in particular on accession and developing countries.

4.2.

A long-term strategy on data information needs

The quality of indicators will depend on the quality of statistics available.
However, the collection of statistical information remains a financially and
administratively onerous process with long lead-in times, particularly in the
agricultural sector. While the development of indicators can be based partly on
existing statistics, it should not be driven by current data availability. The
economy of data collection is certainly important, but it should neither hinder
defining an appropriate geographical level for agri-environmental indicators nor
the identification of relevant environmental themes. In providing an adequate
statistical basis for agri-environmental indicators an appropriate balance will
need to be struck between existing data and the collection of new data.

As far as data management is concerned, the first step should be to make better
use of existing data, when they have not yet been fully exploited. For example,
there is still room to make better use of the results of Eurostat’s Farm Structure
survey, agricultural production statistics and balances and the regional database.
A first step in this direction is the joint publication: "Agriculture, Environment,
Rural development. Facts and Figures"10, but this kind of initiative needs to be
continued and deepened in close collaboration with producers and users of
statistics.

to advance this indicator work, Eurostat will gather as much
In order
information as possible must be gathered on local studies (sub-regional level) or
national or regional surveys - where they exist- of agricultural practices,

10

Prepared in collaboration between EUROSTAT, DG Agriculture and DG Environment

22

landscape and its changes and rural development. A synthesis will be produced
of the data available, methods used, results obtained and possibilities for more
widespread use and for monitoring over time.

On the basis of this synthesis of existing data and indicators, new indicators will
be proposed to deal with environmental aspects of agriculture. Particular
attention will be given to good farming practices, to landscape and its changes,
and rural development at regional or sub-regional level.

An important conclusion to be expected is the proposal of additional variables to
be collected under the European agricultural statistics system. This will include
specific proposals on how they should be collected (methodology, use of
existing surveys and/or introduction of new tools for data collection).

Other sources of information, such as the geographical databases managed by
the Joint Research Centre and the European Environment Agency, the CORINE
landcover data base, and the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) should
be better exploited in the development of agri-environmental indicators. The
information provided by member states through rural development programmes
and other reporting requirements will be particularly important in increasing our
knowledge about site specific characteristics. If provided in an appropriate
format
established covering both environmental
characteristics as well as definitions of good farming practice. Information on
use of the Common Rules Regulation will also provide insights.

a database

could be

The Commission therefore proposes to consolidate the use of existing sources of
information as well as identifying future needs. This would take the form of a
Communication to the Council “Information needs for sustainable agricultural
and rural development: Statistical needs for assessing the integration of
environmental and agricultural policies” and would cover the following themes:

–

–

–

–

facilitating the process of existing data collection and treatment,

identifying common priorities on agri-environmental indicator,

improving synergies between the Commission and the EEA. A joint
seminar on agri-environmental indicators was held between the EEA and
the Commission Services in early 1999 and will form the basis for further
co-operation,

improving the use of data and indicators currently developed by Member
States. Contributions by Member States in the OCED have highlighted the
richness and diversity of indicators and statistics at national level. A key
challenge is to bring them together at a European level and facilitate
exchange of best practice,

–

identifying new needs.

A broad understanding of current data availability and future needs would
enable the EU to take a long-term view of the development of statistical
information in the field of agri-environment.

23

4.3.

Developing Environmental Efficiency Indicators

and the

Environmental efficiency indicators can provide useful information about long-
term trends
relationship between production and associated
environmental costs and benefits. They can help indicate those practices that are
most likely to contribute to broad environmental targets and, of course, those
which are most damaging. In the medium to long-term, the capacity of Europe
to maintain a high level of environmental quality and a significant food
production capacity will depend on reducing the environmental costs of
agricultural production. Environmental efficiency indicators therefore help
highlight
role both technology and traditional methods of
production have to play in sustainable agriculture. Such work remains currently
underdeveloped and requires greater attention and possibly further resources.

the important

4.4.

Using landscape to classify European Agri-ecosystems

Landscape enables us to better understand the specific characteristics of sites
and the nature of the interaction between agricultural practices and the
environment11. Together with territorially differentiated information on driving
forces and the state of the environment, landscape can form the basis for
describing in a relatively simple way the balance between agricultural activity
and the ecosystem of which it is part. Such a system would enable policymakers
to identify vulnerable or threatened areas and take appropriate action and to
better understand the nature of the threat or vulnerability. Work of this type has
already been undertaken by some member states and could be extended to a
Community level. Such a system would seek to build on existing member state
classifications in order to present information in a concise and synthetic manner.
From a policy point of view at least five groups of landscape types are present
across the Union in varying degrees:

–

–

–

–

–

high nature value and cultural landscapes threatened by the intensification
of agriculture and where environmental quality is very dependent on strict
constraints being placed on farming activity,

farming dependent high nature value and cultural landscapes threatened by
the marginalisation of agriculture and where agriculture has a particular
role in creating environmental quality,

landscapes characterised by low-input farming, low pollution and resource
depletion as well as the enhancement of habitats and biodiverity,

landscapes characterised by intensive or extensive good farming practice
in a balanced relationship with the land leading to the maintenance of
natural resources, biodiversity and semi-natural ecosystems,

landscapes characterised by overexploitation, pollution, and resource
depletion leading to the deterioration of natural resources, biodiversity and
semi-natural ecosystems.

11

OECD, COM/AGR/CA/ENV/EPOC(98) 136.

24

In the medium to long term, the development of such a system would provide a
good tool for both providing information to policymakers and making the
integration of environmental concerns into agricultural policy transparent to the
wider public.

4.5.

Bringing agri-environmental concerns closer to the citizen

The development of agri-environmental
indicators presents a particular
opportunity to engage citizens in both rural and urban areas. Alongside
the multifunctional role of agriculture and the
improved competitiveness,
growth of publicly remunerated environmental services will play a large part in
ensuring the viability of many rural areas. It is therefore important for society in
general to understand the issues at stake and, indeed, the quality and diversity of
Europe’s rural environment.

The role of agriculture in maintaining the landscape and semi-natural rural
is increasingly reflected in a range of initiatives such as the
environment
European Landscape Convention (ELC) and the Pan European Biological and
Landscape diversity strategy (PEBLDS). The site specificity of agricultural
activities fits closely with growing concerns about sustainable development and
landscape quality at a very local level expressed in Local Agenda 21.

A key challenge for the coming years will be to ensure that the development of
agri-environmental indicators complements European initiatives such as the
ELC and PEBLDS. It is equally important that the development of indicators
can be used to improve communication and the transparency of EU policies.
There is scope here for greater involvement of NGOs and farmers groups. There
is also a need to ensure that the European citizen is well informed, in an
understandable manner of the changing relationship between agriculture and the
environment. In this respect,
indicators should be developed on a sound
scientific basis that incorporates the social concerns of interested groups and
society at large. In return, those groups and citizens must be reassured that
sound scientific knowledge is duly incorporated into the indicators.

4.6.

Developing Specific Headline Indicators for Agriculture

One way of communicating broad trends to a wider public and policymakers is
to develop a separate, restricted sub-set of "headline" indicators for the sector.
Although such a restricted list cannot reflect the complexity of the relationship
between agriculture and the environment, it can provide some information on
important key issues provided indicators are selected in a balanced manner. A
possible set of headline indicators for a number of key agri-environmental
concerns are presented below:

Factors and responses
influencing farming practices
Farming practices

Harmful and beneficial
processes
Site specific state
Global Environmental Impact

Key issue
Enhancement beyond good
farming practice
Rational input use

Possible Headline indicator
Expenditure/area on agri-
environmental programmes
Pesticide use risk (factoring in
integrated pest management)

Benefits outweigh harmful effects Nitrogen balance

Ecosystem health
Ecosystem Richness

Bird species on agricultural land
Landscape diversity

25

In comparison with the comprehensive indicator systems presented above, a
short list of headline indicators of this kind has to be used carefully. It should be
used only for the purpose for which it is designed - namely to give some
indication to the public of certain broad trends in the agri-environment
relationship, particularly at sub-national levels. In presenting such a restricted
set, great care must therefore be taken to point out that it does not give a
complete picture of this relationship.

For these reasons, it is proposed to test the feasibility of a first set of possible
headline indicators, before a decision on their potential for further long-term
development. As regards food safety, other possible indicators might include
agricultural and other contaminants in food, water quality at
the stage of
extraction. Other indicators for biodiversity reflecting biodiversity in the soil
provide good indicators of rapid change.

4.7.

Timetable

The rhythm of environmental integration into the CAP will be largely set by the
implementation of Agenda 2000. However, a timetable for the development of
indicators can be summarised as follows:

Action

Timetable

Milestones

Task 1

Further development of set of agri-
environmental indicators

Ongoing

– Completion of OECD

stocktaking

– Synthesis of mid-term

review 2004

Task 2

Communication on Statistical
Information Needs

End 2000, dependent
on data availability in
Member States

– Development of

sustainable development
indicators 2003

Task 3

Environmental Efficiency
Indicators

Ongoing

Task 4

Classification of Agri-
environmental systems

Full system developed
by 2006

Task 5

Improved communication and
complementarity with other
initiatives

Ongoing

Task 6

Agricultural Headline Indicators

Ongoing

– First review end of 2000
– First set of indicators

2003

– Land cover/land use

variables identified mid
2000

– Classification system
developed by 2003

– Presentation of

Communication to
Parliament

26