REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the application of the Farm Advisory System as defined in Article 12 and 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Date: 2010-11-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy, common organisation of markets, environmental protection, reform of the CAP, simplification of legislation

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 15.11.2010 
COM(2010) 665 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL  

on the application of the Farm Advisory System as defined in Article 12 and 13 of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

4.5. 

5. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

The EU framework for the FAS................................................................................... 4 

Legal framework .......................................................................................................... 4 

Support for FASs from rural development funds in 2007 – 2013................................ 4 

Implementation of the FAS by Member States............................................................ 5 

State of play of Member States’ FASs......................................................................... 5 

Financing the FAS........................................................................................................ 6 

Evaluation of the FAS.................................................................................................. 6 

Improving the FAS in the future .................................................................................. 7 

Clarification of the FAS and farm advisory services ................................................... 7 

The scope of the FAS................................................................................................... 7 

Clarifying the role of FAS advisors vis à vis other actors in the field of cross 
compliance ................................................................................................................... 8 

Promoting the FAS....................................................................................................... 9 

Management of the FAS ............................................................................................ 10 

Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 11 

EN 

2 

   EN 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL  

on the application of the Farm Advisory System (FAS) as defined in Article 12 and 13 of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Member  States  have  the  obligation  to  establish  a  system  for  advising  farmers  on  land  and 
farm management, referred to hereinafter as the Farm Advisory System (FAS). The FAS is a 
major  component  of  the  2003  Common  Agricultural  Policy  (CAP)  reform  and  had  to  be 
introduced by 20071. The objective of the FAS is to help farmers to become more aware of 
material flows and of on-farm processes relating to the environment, food safety and animal 
health and welfare. It was introduced at the same time as the cross compliance system, under 
which  CAP  support  is  paid  in  full  only  if  farmers  meet  certain  requirements  relating  to  the 
environment, food safety, animal health and animal welfare. There are two rural development 
policy  measures  designed  to  help  Member  States  set  up  farm  advisory  services  and  to  help 
farmers use them. The FAS is indeed primarily a tool to help farmers fulfil those requirements 
and thus avoid financial penalties under cross compliance. 

Under Article 12(4) of Council Regulation EC) No 73/2009, the Commission must send the 
Council a report on the application of the FAS — accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate 
proposals. That is the purpose of the present report — to inform the European Parliament and 
the Council on the state of implementation of the FAS and to propose possible improvements. 
It  is  largely  based  on  information  received  from  the  Member  States  in  response  to  a 
questionnaire and on an evaluation study carried out for the Commission2. The FAS was also 
discussed  extensively  with  the  Member  States  at  five  FAS  workshops  organised  by  the 
Commission  in  2006-2010.  These  discussions  covered  the  content,  structures,  methods  and 
tools for national advisory services. 

The deadline for setting up the system was 1 January 2007. Since the start-up period lasted 
from 2007 to 2009, and given the complexity of the information required, it is not yet possible 
to  give  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  capacity  of  the  national  farm  advisory  systems  or  of  the 
services  they  provide  to  the  farmers.  The  purpose  of  this  report  is  therefore  not  to  offer  an 
exhaustive  overview  but  to  provide  input  for  a  debate  in  the  Council  and  the  European 
Parliament in the course of 2010-2011.  

1 
2 

Article 13-16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. 
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/fas/index_en.htm. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
2. 

THE EU FRAMEWORK FOR THE FAS 

2.1. 

Legal framework 

Each  Member  State  is  legally  obliged  to  set  up  a  national  FAS  offering  advice  to 
farmers. The FAS must cover at least the statutory management requirements and the 
‘good agricultural and environmental condition’ (GAEC) referred to in Articles 4 to 
6  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  73/2009.  However,  the  field  of  advice  is  not 
limited  to  cross-compliance  standards:  Member  States  may  decide  to  include  other 
issues.  Each  national  FAS  may  be  run  by  one or more designated authorities or by 
private  bodies.  Since  the  2008  CAP  Health  Check,  each  Member  State  is  free  to 
decide  (on  the  basis  of  objective  criteria)  which  categories  of  farmers  will  have 
priority access to the FAS, without any further criteria being laid down at EU level. 

Farmers use the FAS on a voluntary basis and remain responsible for acting on the 
advice  they  receive.  In  this  respect  the  FAS  does  not  in  any  way  affect  their 
obligation and responsibility to meet the legal requirements. However, the EU legal 
framework  acknowledges  that  farmers  who  ask  for  advice  are  more  likely  to  be 
aware of how to fulfil the legal requirements. When selecting farms for inspection, 
therefore, Member States may choose to consider these farmers as presenting a lower 
risk.  

Raising  farmers’  awareness  of  EU  legal  requirements  is  the  main  goal  of  the  FAS. 
Advice  must  therefore  be  clearly  distinguished  from  checks  carried  out  in  the 
framework of cross compliance or to ensure compliance with the sectoral legislation. 
In  this  connection,  Member  States  must  ensure  that  the  FAS  operators  do  not 
disclose personal or individual information, or data they obtain in the course of their 
advisory activity, to persons other than the farmer managing the holding concerned. 
The  only  exception  to  this  rule  is  if  FAS  operators  discover  some  irregularity  or 
infringement which is covered by an obligation laid down in EU or national law to 
inform a public authority, in particular in the case of criminal offences. 

2.2. 

Support for FASs from rural development funds in 2007 – 2013 

The FAS as laid down in the first pillar of the CAP may be funded under the second 
pillar through two measures3. 

First  there  is  the  measure  co-financing  farmers’  use  of  farm  advisory  services.  The 
aim here is to help farmers meet the costs arising from their use of advisory services 
to improve the overall performance of their holding. As a minimum, these advisory 
services  must  cover  the  statutory  management  requirements,  the  GAEC  and  the 
occupational  safety  standards  based  on  EU  legislation.  This  support  is  limited  to 
80 % of the eligible cost per advisory service, up to a maximum amount of €
 1500. 
Authorities  and  bodies  selected  to  provide  advisory  services  must  have  appropriate 
resources  (including  qualified  staff,  administrative  and  technical  facilities,  advisory 
experience and reliability) with respect to the cross-compliance requirements and the 
occupational  safety  standards.  The  Commission  has  drawn  up  guidelines  on  the 

3 

Articles 24 and 25 and recitals 18 and 19 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
conditions  for  granting  aid  and  prioritising  certain  target  groups,  and  on  the 
frequency  of  the  advice,  the  use  of  public  or  non-public  advisory  bodies  and  the 
coordination and the supervision of those bodies. 

Second,  there  is  the  measure  co-financing  the  setting-up  of  farm  advisory  services. 
To  help  cover  the  costs  of  setting  up  such  services,  Member  States  may  grant 
degressive support over a maximum period of five years.  

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FAS BY MEMBER STATES 

In  January  2009,  in  order  to  prepare  for  this  report,  the  Commission  sent  out  a  structured 
questionnaire on the organisation and setting up of FASs in the Member States. It contained, 
for  example,  questions  on  legal  provisions,  the  bodies  responsible  for  coordination, 
certification  and  control,  priority  groups  of  farmers,  geographical  organisation,  the  number 
and type of advisory bodies, their specialisation, the number of farmers reached, the methods 
used,  financing,  etc.  Member  States  (MS)  were  also  asked  a  number  of  open  questions 
concerning  the  problems  they  encountered  and  their  suggestions  for  the  future  FAS 
framework.  The  replies  to  the  questionnaire  provided  implementation  data  for  2008.  These 
data  and  the  FAS  evaluation  study  commissioned  by  the  Commission  in  2009  may  be 
summarised as follows.  

3.1. 

State of play of Member States’ FASs 

In most Member States the FAS became fully operational only in 2008. Preparatory 
work  to  set  up  the  FAS  (passing  legislation,  publishing  calls  for  tenders,  selecting 
advisory bodies, etc.) was carried out in 2007. In around half of the Member States 
the  FAS  was  set  up  as  a  specific  service,  complementary  to  existing  extension 
services.  In  the  other  cases  the  FAS  was  interwoven  with  the  existing  extension 
services.  

Generally (in 24 MS), the FAS is coordinated and supervised by public bodies. The 
advisory bodies are selected via calls for tenders (14 MS) and by designating private 
(5  MS)  or  public  bodies  (5  MS).  Most  Member  States  have  set  the  threshold  for 
advisors’ minimum qualifications at university level (BSc or MSc). 

In  14  Member  States  the  FAS  focuses  strictly  on  cross  compliance,  while  in  the 
remaining countries the advice embraces broader issues, such as the competitiveness 
of  the  holdings,  the  environmental  impact  of  farming  practices  and  support  for  the 
implementation  of 
agri-environmental 
commitments). 

rural  development  measures 

(e.g. 

The  two  approaches  most  widely  adopted  were  on-farm  one-to-one  advice  (all  MS 
except  UK-England)  and  on-farm  small  group  discussions  —  the  latter  often 
complementing  the  former.  Computer-based  information  tools  and  checklists  have 
helped  provide  advice  in  various  MS.  In  22  Member  States,  farmers’  first  contact 
with the FAS was through telephone help lines.  

So far, there has not been much prioritising of groups of farmers, except the initial 
obligation  to  give  priority  to  farmers  receiving  more  than  €
 15 000  in  direct 
payments. Some MS said they had problems in reaching small farms. In the EU as a 
whole, the number of farmers receiving FAS advice was rather limited (around 5 % 

EN 

5 

   EN 

of  farmers  receiving  direct  payments  were  given  one-to-one  advice  in  2008).  The 
main  beneficiaries  of  the  FAS  were  large  farms,  already  familiar  with  the  existing 
advisory services. 

3.2. 

Financing the FAS 

Farmers  had  free  access  to  one-to-one  on-farm  advice  (5  MS),  or  partially 
contributed  to  the  costs  of  that  advice  (20 %  to  50 %  of  the  full  cost),  or  entirely 
covered these costs (2 MS).  

The  measure  supporting  farmers’  use  of  advisory  services  was  planned  in  20  MS, 
covering  1 123 000  farmers.  The  total  budget  for  2007-2013  amounts  to  €
 870.5 
million — 0.6 % of total public expenditure on rural development (RD) — of which 
1.3 % was spent in the first two years, covering 12 250 farmers.  

The measure supporting the setting-up of management, relief and advisory services 
was  planned  by  7  MS,  with  4  MS  (ES,  MT, PT, IT)  clearly focusing on  FAS. The 
 172.9  million,  i.e.  0.1 %  of  total  RD  public 
2007-2013  budget  amounts  to  €
expenditure, of which 2 % was spent in the first two years.  

3.3. 

Evaluation of the FAS 

The  FAS  evaluation  report  concluded  that,  overall,  the  FAS  did  help  increase 
farmers’  awareness  of  material  flows  and  on-farm  processes  relating  to  the 
environment,  food  safety  and  animal  health/welfare.  One-to-one  advice  using 
checklists  was  considered  particularly  effective,  as  it  is  a  very  individualised  and 
structured way of providing advice. In some Member States, the establishment of the 
FAS represented a good opportunity to rethink and improve their wider advice and 
knowledge information systems in the agricultural sector. 

The  FAS  helped  farmers  to  meet  cross-compliance  requirements,  and  this  was  the 
main motivation for farmers to make use of the system. FAS support also increased 
farmers’  financial  management  skills  (accountancy)  and  improved  their  book-
keeping as regards cross-compliance obligations. 

Overall,  however,  the  effectiveness  of  the  FAS  was  still  limited,  since  few  farmers 
sought  the  advice  on  offer.  The  evaluators  see  potential  for  improvement  since  the 
FAS  has  reached  more  farmers  (up  to  20 %  of  those  receiving  direct  payments)  in 
Member  States  which  implemented  the  system  from  2005  onwards.  In  some  cases 
the  pre-financing  of  the  advice  may  have  discouraged  some  farmers  from  taking 
advantage of the FAS.  

The evaluators considered it a fundamental prerequisite for the FAS that EU farmers 
should have access to the advice on a voluntary basis, since following advice is by its 
very  nature  voluntary  —  in  contrast  with  compulsory  control/certification  systems. 
So  far,  the  FAS  had  done  little  to  improve  EU  farmers’  perception  of  the  CAP. 
Farmers often saw the FAS as being strictly about cross compliance and the related 
system of farm inspections, and this cast it in a negative light. However, there were 
cases where the FAS had succeeded in building a trustful and effective relationship 
between  the  farmers  and  the  advisors.  The  evaluation  report  recommends  that  the 
voluntary concept and overall flexible architecture of the FAS should be maintained. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

4. 

IMPROVING THE FAS IN THE FUTURE 

Based on the experience of these early years of implementation and on the evaluation study, 
the Commission makes the following proposals for improvement. These proposals may take 
the form of guidelines (recommendations) to the Member States or may necessitate amending 
current EU legislation.  

4.1. 

Clarification of the FAS and farm advisory services 

(1) 

The  terms  ‘Farm  Advisory  System’,  and  ‘farm  advisory  services’  should  be 
clarified. The ‘Farm Advisory System’ covers the overall organisation and the 
various public and/or private operators that deliver ‘farm advisory services’ to 
a  farmer  in  a  Member  State  (Article  12  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 
73/2009).  The  existence  of  a  national  FAS  guarantees  that  each  farmer  can 
seek and receive advice on at least the basic cross-compliance requirements in 
the  field  of  the  environment,  public  health,  animal  and  plant  health,  animal 
welfare and keeping land in good agricultural and environmental condition. It 
is  important  to  distinguish  as  clearly  as  possible  between  advice,  being  the 
output of a Farm Advisory System, and the mere provision of information to 
farmers.  ‘Farm  advisory  services’  should  assess  the  specific  situation  of  the 
farmer  and  not  only  present  general  information.  The  provision  of 
information on cross-compliance requirements is already obligatory pursuant 
to Article 4(2) of Regulation 73/2009.  

(2) 

The FAS is designed to help not only farmers who receive CAP payments but 
all  farmers  in  the  European  Union,  including  (for  example)  specialised  pig 
farmers in need of advice on the Nitrates Directive.  

4.2. 

The scope of the FAS 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

Cross-compliance  requirements  and  other  obligations  to  be  respected  by  the 
beneficiaries  should  be  within  the  core  minimum  scope  of  the  FAS  and  its 
objectives,  for  both  first  and  second  pillar.  These  requirements  should  be 
adequately covered by FAS advice. The FAS should first and foremost help 
farmers comply with rules. 

Obligatory  elements  to  be  covered  by  the  FAS,  in  both  the  first  and  second 
pillars, should include the minimum requirements for the use of fertilisers and 
plant  protection  products  use.  These  requirements  form  part  of  cross 
compliance for farmers receiving agri-environment payments. 

Via  its  priority  focus  on  cross-compliance  requirements,  the  FAS  already 
covers many practices relating to climate change — practices that reduce the 
impact of agriculture on the climate and that help farms adapt to changing and 
more variable climatic conditions4. Current GAEC standards are essential for 

4 

For  instance,  the  standard  on  protection  of  permanent  pasture,  the  crop  rotation  standard  and  catch 
crops, the minimum soil cover standard, reduced tillage under the minimum land management standard, 
standards  on  crop  residue  management,  standards  on  the  maintenance  of  soil  organic  matter  and 
requirements under the Nitrates Directive concerning the application and storage of manure. All these 
requirements set limits on practices that have impacts on farm-level GHG emissions. They are covered 
under the FAS via the priority for cross-compliance requirements. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
keeping organic carbon in agricultural soils and for ensuring their sustainable 
use. However, it may be worth including within the FAS framework specific 
action on climate change, for instance screening good practices and carrying 
out  specific  promotion  exercises  on  farms,  including  the  provision  of 
technology-related  advice.  One  way  to  ensure  that the  MS  develop such 
capacities could be to include a specific reference in a legal text highlighting 
this  need. Advisors  may  be  very  useful  in  summarising  good  practices  and 
making  them  better  known  to  farmers.  A  list  of  good  practices  could  be 
summarised at EU level. Advisors could be obliged to follow specific training 
in  understanding  and  disseminating  important  farming  practices  relating  to 
climate change. 

4.3. 

Clarifying  the  role  of  FAS  advisors  vis  à  vis  other  actors  in  the  field  of  cross 
compliance 

(6)  Member States should be reminded of the common-sense distinction between 
control (checks and inspections) and advice. There must be a clear separation 
between  advice  and  controls.  In  any  case,  the  farmer  is  responsible  for  his 
own actions. 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

It  is  important  to  maintain  the  current  rule  that  individual  data  from  visited 
farms  should  under  no  circumstances  be  passed  on  from  advisors  to 
inspectors. Even if this were done anonymously it would constitute a breach 
of  confidentiality.  Providing  advisors  with  inspection  data  on  individual 
farmers  also  tends  to  be  counterproductive,  as  it  may  destroy  the  necessary 
trust in the advisor. Evidence shows that Member States have not always fully 
understood these principles. 

Giving advisors aggregated data from farm inspections could be useful,  but 
should  not  be  made  obligatory.  If  the  advisor  asks  for  it  in  order  to  better 
target the advice, the inspecting body may hand over aggregated data on, for 
instance, the types of non-compliance most frequently found.  

FAS  advisors  should  not  limit  their  efforts  to  helping  farmers  meet  their 
practical  obligations  under  cross  compliance,  but  should  also  explain  the 
objectives  of  these  obligations  and  the  underlying  policies,  and  how  they 
contribute to sustainable agriculture. A farmer who understands the rationale 
behind specific obligations will be more inclined to fulfil them. 

(10)  New  advice  topics  are  emerging  and  a  farmer  will  require  help  on  a  broad 
range  of  issues  —  from  economic  matters  to  ecological  issues  to  nature 
conservation.  FAS  advisors  will  not  be  able  to  reply  to  all  questions  but 
should be well informed and able to act as a ‘general practitioner’, directing 
farmers if necessary to specialist advisors. For instance, when a farmer needs 
to (re)orient his production and wants advice on agricultural markets, the FAS 
advisor should be able to put the farmer in touch with services specialising in 
such  matters,  or  guide  him  towards  sources  of  relevant  information,  e.g. 
production  data.  A  similar  approach  could  be  recommended for  organic 
farming. For instance, farmers may need advice on how to switch to organic 
production, or on market opportunities and better farming practices (see also 
proposal  19).  FAS  coordinating  bodies  should  play  an  important  role  in 

EN 

8 

   EN 

helping the advisors to network, for instance by providing the contact details 
of specialist advisors and saying which fields they specialise in. 

4.4. 

Promoting the FAS 

(11)  The scope of the measure on the use of farm advisory services as defined in 
Article  24  of  regulation  1698/2005  should  be  clarified.  It  should  be  made 
clear that a farmer is not obliged to take up advice on each cross-compliance 
requirement  in  order  to  be  entitled  to  receive  support  for  the  use  of  a  farm 
advisory  service5.  This  should  reduce  the  administrative  burden  of  the 
measure for farmers and administrations, and the cost for farmers. The farmer 
will be able to apply more quickly for reimbursement of his/her share of the 
advice  costs,  as  it  will  no  longer  be  an  obligation  to  wait  until  all  fields  of 
cross  compliance  are  covered.  However,  FAS  coordinating  bodies  and 
advisors  should  keep  giving  the  necessary  attention  to  those  obligations 
which are the core issues for the FAS, as farmers asking for advice may not 
always realise that they need advice specifically on cross compliance. 

(12)  At  the  same  time,  the  obligatory  coverage  of  occupational  safety  standards 
under  the  second  pillar  measure  on  the  use  of  FAS  should  be  flexible  and 
limited to the relevant elements. 

(13)  The frequency of uptake of the measure on the use of farm advisory services 
should  be  left  open.  Member  States  have  so  far  programmed  two  to  three 
advisory  services  for  the  rural  development  period  2007-2013.  It  should  be 
made clear that a farmer may ask for more services, e.g. at least once a year. 
The flexibility to ask for advice more frequently, together with the flexibility 
in  the  obligatory  scope  per  advisory  service  as  cited  in  proposal  (11),  will 
make  the  measure  more  targeted  and  attractive.  The  cost  of  each  advisory 
service will be reduced as it will be limited to providing targeted advice at a 
moment when the farmer has a real need. 

(14)  The scope of cross compliance has been widened since 2003. Costs have also 
risen and expectations from FAS advice going beyond cross compliance are 
higher  than  in  2003,  given  new  challenges  such  as  climate  change,  water 
issues, the need to preserve biodiversity, etc6. Member States are asking the 
EU to increase the budget for farm advice. The consequence of proposals (11) 
to  (13)  should  accommodate  this  increased  demand:  farmers  will  be  able  to 
take up targeted advice more frequently, and on a broader range of subjects, 
within the maximum amount of €

 1500 support for a farm advisory service7. 

5 

6 

7 

As part of the 2009 simplification process, there was discussion as to whether advice co-financed from 
the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) should be obliged to cover all cross-
compliance  fields  and  occupational  safety  standards,  as  laid  down  in  Art.  24  of  Council  Regulation 
(EC) No 1698/2005. As part of the alignment process in September 2010, the Commission intends to 
amend Council Regulation 1698/2005 in order to make the measure more flexible. 
One of the actions envisaged in the 2009 White Paper: ‘Adapting to climate change’ (COM(2009) 147) 
is to ‘examine the capacity of the Farm Advisory System to reinforce training, knowledge and adoption 
of new technologies that facilitate adaptation‘. Further details are given in the DG AGRI Commission 
Staff Working document accompanying the White Paper: ‘Adapting to climate change: the challenge 
for European agriculture and rural areas’ (SEC(2009) 417). 
Article 24 and Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
(15)  The  Commission  wants  to  emphasise  that  FAS  is  also  important  for  small 
farmers. This group is currently not being properly reached by FAS services, 
yet small farmers are at least as important as others in terms of their need to 
comply  and  their  possible  lack  of  awareness  of  their  obligations.  The 
measures  proposed  here  are  also  intended  to  tackle  this  point,  however 
Member States should be pro-active and reflect on how to target farmers who 
do no yet realise their need for advice. 

(16)  Member States should do more to promote the FAS, for instance by enclosing 
a  list  of  advisory  bodies  when  sending  application  forms  to  farmers,  or  by 
arranging for farm inspectors to give that list to the farmer if any infringement 
is detected.  

(17)  To  make  farmers  more  aware  of  the  FAS,  Article  4  of  Council  Regulation 
(EC) No 73/2009 should include an obligation on Member States to provide 
farmers with the list of FAS advisors. 

4.5.  Management of the FAS  

(18)  The  Commission  strongly  recommends  that  FAS  coordinating  bodies 
organise basic and regular follow-up training for each advisor, at least on all 
cross-compliance issues. Such training should cover both the farmers’ actual 
obligations and the underlying policies. Training is particularly needed in the 
area of new action to deal, for instance, with climate change. 

(19)  Member States should create synergies between different instruments such as 
advice, training, information, extension services and research, respecting the 
characteristics  of  each  instrument  but  integrating  them  in  a  coherent  way. 
Furthermore,  information  from  advisors  on  the  practical  implementation  of 
cross-compliance  requirements  may  be  of  particular  use  to  the  authorities 
managing FAS and cross compliance. It is therefore important that actors in 
the field of cross compliance, such as advisors, FAS coordinating bodies and 
the  cross  compliance  managing  authorities,  should  share  their  knowledge  of 
the  practical  implementation  of  cross-compliance  requirements.  They  could, 
for  example,  hold  regular  information  exchange  sessions,  once  or  twice  a 
year.  

(20)  To  ensure  coherence  between  pillars,  the  second-pillar  implementing 
provision  on  appropriate  staff  qualifications  for  FAS  advisors  could  be 
extended to the first-pillar rules for FAS8. 

(21)  Member States are reminded that the Commission, while not wishing to add 
any administrative burden, considers it essential to evaluate and monitor the 
FAS,  especially  in  view  of  discussions  on  the  future  of  FAS  and  the  farm 
advisory service measures in the post-2013 CAP. Such evaluation should not 

8 

The  second-pillar  implementing  rules  pursuant  to  Article  15  of  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1974/2006  specify  that  co-financed  farm  advisory  services  ‘shall  have  appropriate  resources  in  the 
form  of  qualified  staff’.  The  guidelines  for  this  measure  say  that  staff  qualifications  can  be  set  via  a 
minimum  level  of  education  or  certification.  The  second-pillar  measure  on  the  use  of  farm  advisory 
services is being applied in 20 Member States. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

                                                 
lead  to  unnecessary  data  exchange  on  individual  farm  records  nor  to  an 
excessive administrative burden. However, it is of prime importance to ensure 
the effectiveness of the FAS by assessing the quantity and quality of advice 
given (e.g. its usefulness and the level of satisfaction of the farmer). 

5. 

CONCLUSION 

In the light of the evaluation set out in this report, the Commission considers that the FAS is 
an essential tool for a successful implementation of the CAP. Farmers are supported in their 
efforts  to  comply  with  the  EU’s  legal  requirements  relating  to  the  environment,  food  safety 
and animal health and welfare. By assisting them with these ‘cross-compliance’ requirements, 
the FAS helps farmers avoid losing CAP payments. A farmer receiving advice is more likely 
to understand his cross-compliance obligations, and will thus more readily comply with them.  

Advisory  services  are  certainly  not  new  in  many  Member  States,  but  they  may  have  been 
taking place in a piecemeal manner. By obliging each Member State to have a FAS in place, 
the legislator has adopted a more strategic overarching approach. The efforts being made in 
the  Member  States  illustrate  the  important  role  that  the  system  and  the  FAS  coordinating 
bodies can play in helping farmers understand and implement EU rules.  

The start-up phase has required considerable effort, especially from Member States where few 
if any advisory services were available in the past. For other Member States, setting up a FAS 
has  been  more  a  question  of  coordinating  existing  services  so  as  to  give  farmers  a  single 
contact point for advice on practical questions.  

Moreover,  with  new  challenges  emerging,  expectations  from  advisory  services  have  risen 
since  2003.  The  FAS  should  therefore  pro-actively  develop  and  encompass  issues  that  go 
beyond legal requirements under cross compliance.  

The Commission therefore makes the following recommendations to the Member States:  

•  Keep the scope of the FAS broad but with the rules to be respected as the core minimum 

scope. 

•  Emphasise  the  role  of  the  FAS  advisor  as  a  'general  practitioner'  directing  farmers,  if 

necessary, to specialist advisors.  

•  Use  aggregated  farm  inspection  data  to  help  target  the  advice  better,  while  taking  into 
account  the  great  importance  of  respecting  the  confidentiality  of  advice  data.  The  FAS 
advisor should act as a ‘general practitioner’, interlinking all different aspects of farming 
with a holistic approach. He should explain to farmers not only the EU’s requirements but 
also their objectives, and the underlying policies. 

•  Promote  the  FAS  via  specific  measures,  such  as  taking  appropriate  opportunities  to  give 

farmers the list of advisors, ensuring that small farms are reached too.  

•  Improve the management of the FAS, and ensure that knowledge is shared between actors 
in  the  field  of  cross  compliance.  FAS  coordinating  bodies  should  enhance  the  synergies 
between various instruments such as advice, training, information, extension services and 
research. It is very important to evaluate and monitor the FAS. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

The Commission further considers that the following actions are necessary: 

•  Clarify  the  terms  ‘FAS’  and  ‘farm  advisory  services’,  clearly  distinguishing  advice  from 
the  mere  provision  of  detailed  information,  and  ensuring  that  the  FAS  is  targeting  all 
farmers in the EU.  

•  Include within the minimum scope of the FAS the minimum requirements for fertiliser and 
plant  protection  products  as  laid  down  in  national  legislation,  and  highlight  the  need  for 
specific action on climate change.  

•  Explain  the  role  of  FAS  advisors  vis  à  vis  other  actors  in  the  field  of  cross  compliance, 

recommending a clear separation between advice and farm inspections.  

•  Promote the FAS by introducing flexibility in the content and frequency of uptake of the 
advisory measure, and by obliging Member States to provide farmers with the list of FAS 
advisors.  

•  Improve the management of the FAS by requiring that advisors are suitably qualified and 
regularly trained, with training sessions being organised by the FAS coordinating bodies. 

These actions may lead to legislative changes in the post-2013 package. 

EN 

12 

   EN