COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Commission Recommendations for Greece’s CAP strategic plan Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Recommendations to the Member States as regards their strategic plan for the Common Agricultural Policy
Date: 2020-12-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: EU strategy, Greece, agricultural policy, climate change policy, common agricultural policy, cooperation on agriculture, digitisation, food security, innovation, rural development

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 18.12.2020  SWD(2020) 372 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Commission Recommendations for Greece’s CAP strategic plan Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Recommendations to the Member States as regards their strategic plan for the Common Agricultural Policy {COM(2020) 846 final} - {SWD(2020) 367 final} - {SWD(2020) 368 final} - {SWD(2020) 369 final} - {SWD(2020) 370 final} - {SWD(2020) 371 final} - {SWD(2020) 373 final} - {SWD(2020) 374 final} - {SWD(2020) 375 final} - {SWD(2020) 376 final} - {SWD(2020) 377 final} - {SWD(2020) 379 final} - {SWD(2020) 384 final} - {SWD(2020) 385 final} - {SWD(2020) 386 final} - {SWD(2020) 387 final} - {SWD(2020) 388 final} - {SWD(2020) 389 final} - {SWD(2020) 390 final} - {SWD(2020) 391 final} - {SWD(2020) 392 final} - {SWD(2020) 393 final} - {SWD(2020) 394 final} - {SWD(2020) 395 final} - {SWD(2020) 396 final} - {SWD(2020) 397 final} - {SWD(2020) 398 final}  
 
 
Contents 

1. 

COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATIONS  FOR  GREECE’S  CAP 
STRATEGIC PLAN ........................................................................................ 2 

1.1 

1.2 

1.3 

1.4 

Foster  a  smart,  resilient  and  diversified  agricultural 
sector ensuring food security ............................................................ 2 

Bolster  environmental  care  and  climate  action  and 
contribute  to  the  environmental-  and  climate-related 
objectives of the Union ...................................................................... 2 

Strengthen  the  socio-economic  fabric  of  rural  areas  and 
address societal concerns .................................................................. 3 

Modernising  the  sector  by  fostering  and  sharing  of 
knowledge, innovation and digitalisation, and encouraging 
their uptake ........................................................................................ 5 

1.5 

Recommendations .............................................................................. 6 

2. 

ANALYSIS 
DEVELOPMENT IN GREECE .................................................................... 9 

AGRICULTURE 

RURAL 

AND 

OF 

2.1 

2.2 

2.3 

2.4 

2.5 

2.6 

2.7 

2.8 

2.9 

Support viable farm income and resilience across the EU 
territory to enhance food security .................................................... 9 

Enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness 
including  greater  focus  on  research,  technology  and 
digitalisation ..................................................................................... 11 

Improve farmers' position in the value chain ............................... 12 

Contribute  to  climate  change  mitigation  and  adaptation, 
as well as sustainable energy........................................................... 13 

Foster sustainable development and efficient management 
of natural resources such as water, soil and air ............................ 15 

Contribute  to  the  protection  of  biodiversity,  enhance 
ecosystem services and preserve habitats and landscapes ........... 17 

Attract 
and 
development in rural areas ............................................................. 19 

facilitate 

business 

farmers 

young 

Promote  employment,  growth,  social  inclusion  and  local 
development  in  rural  areas,  including  bio-economy  and 
sustainable forestry ......................................................................... 21 

Improve  the  response  of  EU  agriculture  to  societal 
demands  on  food  and  health,  including  safe,  nutritious 
and sustainable food, as well as animal welfare ............................ 22 

2.10 

Cross-cutting  objective  on  knowledge,  innovation  and 
digitalisation ..................................................................................... 24 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
1.  COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GREECE’S CAP STRATEGIC 

PLAN 

In  the  framework  of  the  structured  dialogue  for  the  preparation  of  the  common 
agricultural policy (CAP) strategic plan, this document contains the recommendations for 
the  CAP  strategic  plan  of  Greece.  The  recommendations  are  based  on  analysis  of  the 
state of play, the needs  and the priorities for agriculture and rural  areas in Greece. The 
recommendations address the specific economic, environmental and social objectives of 
the future CoAP and in particular the ambition and specific targets of the Farm to Fork 
Strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. As stated in the Farm to Fork Strategy, 
the Commission invites Greece, in its CAP Strategic Plan, to set explicit national values 
for  the  Green  Deal  targets1,  taking  into  account  its  specific  situation  and  these 
recommendations. 

1.1  Foster  a  smart,  resilient  and  diversified  agricultural  sector  ensuring  food 

security 

the  steady 

improvement 

income.  This  was  also  supported  by 

The analysis highlights recent positive income developments for the Greek farm sectors, 
which  reverse  the  previous  negative  trend  and  help  narrow  the  gap  between  farm  and 
in 
non-farm 
competitiveness,  as  reflected  in  the  agricultural  trade  balance,  even  though  it  remains 
negative.  These  encouraging  developments  mainly  result  from  increased  productivity 
growth and the increased share of value added in the food chain captured by the primary 
sector, despite the low degree of producer organisations. However, farm income remains 
very volatile due to the high proportion of crops in production. Despite the crucial role 
that direct payments play in stabilising farm income, significant differences in the level 
of support constrain their effectiveness. These differences, which stem from the historic 
structure of production, have over time lost their justification as they are decoupled from 
both  present  production  realities  and  future  economic  and  environmental  needs, 
especially  as  regards  the  need  to  improve  the  preservation  of  area  under  permanent 
grassland  and  its  integration  into  the  direct  payments  system.  Risk  management  tools, 
which  can  also  play  an  important  role  in  fostering  the  resilience  of  agriculture  (e.g. 
against extreme weather events linked to climate change) exist and are used by a majority 
of  professional  farms.  Therefore,  a  policy  better  targeting  support  measures  towards 
extensive  production,  with  a  greater  share  of  income  support  linked  to  environmental 
performance is therefore desirable.  

1.2  Bolster  environmental  care  and  climate  action  and  contribute  to  the 

environmental- and climate-related objectives of the Union 

The previous observation is also crucially important in order to help meet the European 
Green Deal targets and, in particular to increase the environmental and climate ambition 
of  Greece’s  agricultural  policy,  supported  by  full  implementation  of  standards  (e.g. 
protection of landscape features, ban on conversion of grassland in all Natura 2000 sites, 
requirements  applicable  to  farmers  for  the  birds  habitats).  Even  though  they  do  not 
significantly  contribute  to  EU  greenhouse  gas  (GHG)  emissions,  the  high  share  of 
livestock  emissions  and  the  specific  agronomic  and  pedo-climatic  characteristics  of 

1   It concerns the targets related to use and risk of pesticides, sale of antimicrobials, nutrient loss, area 
under organic farming, high diversity landscape features and access to fast broadband internet. 

2 

 
                                                 
Greek agriculture need to be addressed by means of a specific set of responses . 38% of 
Greek grassland has a favourable status, and the share of landscape elements and fallow 
land  is  very  low,  which  negatively  affects  biodiversity.    In  addition,  Greece  needs  to 
maintain and restore farm and forest habitats as regards the habitats and species identified 
and prioritised in the prioritised action framework for CAP funding in combination with 
the types of species and habitats  relevant for the CAP, indicated in the EU and national 
species and habitats action plans, in particular for the most endangered species.  

Greece  is  among  those  EU  countries  where  water  abstraction  is  a  problem,  and  where 
prolonged periods of water scarcity due to global warming is projected to intensify1. At 
the  same  time,  Greece  needs  to  ensure  that  it  achieves  the  objectives  of  the  Water 
Framework Directive namely preventing the deterioration of water bodies and ensuring 
they  attain  of  good  status  at  least.  Reversing  soil  erosion,  reducing  air  pollution  and 
improving water use efficiency in terms of quantity and quality are important priorities. 
Prioritising  those  practices  that    specifically  address  challenges  related  to  biodiversity, 
soil,  air  and  water  (e.g.  catch  and  cover  crops,  retention  of  crop  residues  on  fields, 
switching to less water intensive crops and improved crop varieties, improving irrigation 
efficiency via water-saving systems and precision farming) combined with an enhanced 
conditionality,  will  be  crucial  to  the  successful  green  transition  of  Greek  agriculture. 
Such an orientation could be supported by: 

  enhancing  the  ongoing  shift  towards  organic  production  and  integrated  pest  and 
pathogen management, thus contributing to the reduction of the use of chemical 
pesticides  

  increasing  the,  albeit  uneven,  introduction  of  practices  linked  to  precision 
farming, improved nutrient management, low input management commitments or 
bioenergy.  

Greece has a high potential to improve the production of renewable energy (solar, wind, 
biomass)  from  waste  and  by-products  in  the  agriculture  and  forestry  sectors  (with  due 
consideration to the effects of air pollution). Considering that Greece is particularly prone 
to forest fires, damage to forests needs to be prevented by supporting forest resilience and 
restoration  in  addition  to  afforestation.  Carbon  farming  approaches  can  be  designed  to 
support  carbon  sequestration  linked  to  land  systems  such  as  agro-forestry.  Essential  to 
this  process  is  the  timely  replacement  of  harvested  or  damaged  forest.  This  has  to  be 
carried out in such a way as to maximise long-term carbon capture (with sustainable eco-
friendly species), preserving stocks and increasing the carbon sinks in forests, their soils 
and harvested wood products. This can be achieved through support and implementation 
measures not only through afforestation, agroforestry and restoration but also by means 
of advice on species selection. On the adaptation side, measures could include awareness 
raising, action to decrease the impacts of extreme weather events, introducing more water 
efficient irrigation/crops  and investing in flood prevention/protection (e.g. natural water 
retention that also works in droughts) and in particular silvo-pastural systems. 

1.3  Strengthen  the  socio-economic  fabric  of  rural  areas  and  address  societal 

concerns 

Such a transition requires Greece to address one of the biggest social challenges facing 
European agriculture, generational renewal. In Greece, the challenge is even more acute 
as  the  country  has  one  of  the  lowest  shares  of  young  farmers  in  the  EU,  which  is 
decreasing, and the ratio of young managers to elderly in Greece is one of the lowest in 
the EU.  

3 

 
Improving  the  succession  of  farms  critically  hinges  on:  i)  more  favourable  economic 
perspectives in rural areas, linked to investments in infrastructure from a variety of both 
public and private sources, and ii) addressing the bottlenecks stemming from legislation 
related  to  land,  its  access  and  its  use.  Rural  areas  in  Greece  suffer  from  a  very  high 
poverty  rate  and  one  of  the  highest  rural  unemployment  rates  (especially  in  young 
people) in the EU. Measures are needed to mitigate the employment and social impacts 
of the recent crisis, including short-term work schemes and ensuring effective activation 
support.  Ensuring  the  protection  of  agricultural  workers,  especially  those  in  precarious, 
seasonal and undeclared employment, will play a major role in delivering on the respect 
of  rights  enshrined  in  legislation,  which  is  an  essential  element  of  the  fair  EU  food 
system  envisaged  in  the  Farm  to  Fork  Strategy.  Moreover,  it  is  necessary  to  support 
business  creation  and  diversification  to  bring  economic  activity  to  rural  areas,  also 
outside  the  agricultural  sector.  The  recent  investment  focus  on  green  transition  merits 
support  for  the  efficient  production  and  use  of  energy,  including  bio-economy,  and 
environmental infrastructure.  

The  recommended  investments  should  also  prioritise  a  stronger  shift  of  production 
towards consumer preferences in such  areas  as  quality production, more  balanced diets 
and health. Sectoral programmes can help increase consumption of fruit and vegetables 
for the benefit of both producers and consumer health. Furthermore, Greece should make 
an effort to shift towards healthier, more environmentally sustainable diets. 

The  national  food  waste  prevention  programme,  as  required  by  the  Waste  Framework 
Directive  could  also  tackle  the  issue  of  food  loss  and  waste  occurring  at  the  primary 
production level and the early stages of the supply chain. 

Moreover, investments can improve standards of living and access to healthcare of both 
Greek citizens and third-country nationals. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) linked to the 
excessive and inappropriate use of antimicrobials in the livestock sector should especially 
be prioritised as the sales of veterinary antimicrobial agents in Greece, in contrast to most 
EU  Member  States,  show  an  upward  trend.  Pig  tail  docking  remains  one  of  the  key 
animal  welfare  issues  that  Greece  has  to  resolve  in  the  near  future,  as  well  as  those 
related  to  farm  biosecurity  and  farm  registration  and  animal  identification  to  protect 
against animal diseases. Greece should also take action to promote the production of eggs 
under non-cage system for laying hens. 

Despite  an  overall  reduction  better  than  the  EU  average  in  harmonised  risk  indicator 
(HRI1), the use of the more hazardous pesticides (candidates for substitution) continues 
to  be    high  and  stable  in  terms  of    percentage  of  total  sales.  There  is  also  a  need  to 
improve implementation of integrated pest management. 

Digital  upskilling  will allow better  access to  e-services, help  businesses  make effective 
use of teleworking, and e-tools, and enable all learners be they at school, university or in 
adult  education  to  fully  participate  in  distance  learning.  Keeping  people,  particularly 
young people, in rural areas and addressing other social challenges requires the enabling 
of  certain  conditions,  such  as  access  to  business  opportunities,  knowledge,  and  basic 
services. 

The specific needs of women in agriculture and rural areas must be carefully considered 
in order to deliver on gender equality and close the gender gaps in employment, pay, and 
pensions.  

4 

 
1.4  Modernising the sector by fostering and sharing of knowledge, innovation 

and digitalisation, and encouraging their uptake 

Addressing  the  above  challenges,  enhancing  the  overall  sustainability  of  Greek 
agriculture  and  thus  contributing  to  the  broader  targets  of  the  CAP’s  future  orientation 
require rapid smart, digital and green transformation of Greek agriculture.  

Knowledge  and  innovation  have  a  key  role  to  play  in  helping  farmers  and  rural 
communities meet future challenges. The agricultural knowledge and innovation system 
(AKIS)  includes  not  only  “Agriculture”,  but  related  farming  and  rural  activities 
(environment,  climate,  biodiversity,  landscape,  food  and  non-food  systems  including 
processing and distribution chains, consumers and citizens, social aspects etc.). A well-
functioning AKIS should enable plenty of knowledge flows between its actors in order to 
respond to the growing needs for information, provide faster innovation and accelerate its 
uptake, and  increase the valorisation of existing knowledge to achieve these objectives. 

It requires improved creation and exchange of knowledge. However, a highly fragmented 
and  weak  AKIS,  including  farm  advisory  services  which  function  poorly,  hamper  the 
creation and exchange of knowledge for farmers. It is essential to improve links between 
public and private advisers and invest in their training and skills. Advisory services and 
operational  groups  should  be  prepared  to  respond  to  the  growing  information  needs  of 
farms regarding  economic, environmental as  well  as social  aspects.  Advisers should be 
supported  to  help  capture  innovative  ideas  from  an  individual  grassroots  level  and 
develop  them  by  setting  up  and  implementing  European  Innovation  Partnership  (EIP) 
operational  group  projects.  Such  “innovation  support  services”  will  become  obligatory 
for Member States post 2020.  

The shortcomings of AKIS may limit the ability to move towards a greener agriculture 
system as  set  out  by the Farm to  Fork Strategy  and the need to  train  farmers on issues 
related to environment/biodiversity. This is despite the fact that the share of Greek rural 
development funding for knowledge transfer and information actions, advisory services, 
farm  management,  farm  relief  services  and  the  E  I  P  has  been  above  the  EU  average. 
However,  a  full  uptake  of  planned  funds  has  not  occurred.  Further  actions  have  to  be 
undertaken  to  increase  knowledge  flows  and  strengthen  links  between  research  and 
practice,  including  the  creation  of  innovation  support  services,  e-infrastructures, 
workshops and platforms for disseminating information, as well as the improvement and 
better dissemination of information available in different information systems. Concrete, 
though not general, examples in recent years show how this orientation also results in a 
positive impact on growth and employment in rural areas. Furthermore, there is a need of 
incentivising impartial  advisers to  acquire sufficient  digital  knowledge and of access  to 
data in order to accelerate the green and digital transition.   

5 

 
 
 
 
 
1.5  Recommendations 

To  address  the  above  interconnected  economic,  environmental/climate  and  social 
challenges, the Commission considers that the Greek CAP strategic plan needs to focus 
its priorities and concentrate its interventions on the following points, while adequately 
taking into account the high territorial diversity of the Greek agriculture and rural areas: 

Foster a smart, resilient and diversified agricultural sector ensuring food security 

•  Improving the resilience of farms through a fairer, more effective and efficient 
distribution  of  direct  payments,  by  applying,  for  example,  the  complementary 
redistributive  income  support  for  sustainability  and  the  reduction  of  payments, 
and  by  further  reducing  differences  in  the  level  of  support  resulting  from  old 
individual  historic  references,  while  taking  into  consideration  agronomic 
conditions and territorial differences.  

•  Improving environmental standards by prioritising interventions in actions that 
promote permanent grassland and their environmental protection, including better 
integration  of  these  areas  into  the  direct  payments  system  and  better  targeting 
support measures towards extensive production systems. 

•  Improve  farmers’  position  in  the  food  supply  chain  by  supporting  the 
formation of producer organisations and cooperatives as well as strengthening the 
organisation  of  agrifood  markets,  and  by  targeting  higher  added  value  products, 
like organic products. 

Bolster environmental care and climate action and contribute to the environmental- and 
climate-related objectives of the Union 

•  Developing  the  Greek  bio-economy  by  increasing  the  contribution  of 
agricultural  waste  and  by-products  in  the  production  of  total  renewable 
energy  through  private  and  public  investments,  focusing  on  energy  production 
from anaerobic fermentation, solar and wind, and by supporting farmers through 
training and advice and preserving at the same time the attractiveness of the rural 
landscapes. 

•  Contributing  to  the  EU  Green  Deal  target  on  reducing  nutrient  losses  and 
improving soil health by addressing soil erosion through effective implementation 
of  an  enhanced  conditionality  and  by  adopting  agro-ecological  practices,  low 
input  and  soil  management  commitments,  a  better  nutrient  management  (e.g. 
animal  housing,  fertilisation  techniques)  and  practices  such  as  the  retention  of 
crop residues on fields, and precision farming. Appropriate training and advice to 
farmers are also essential to achieve this target. 

•  Addressing  water  use  efficiency,  especially  in  light  of  climate  change 
projections  for  water  scarcity,  with  practices  and 
targeted  management 
commitments  (e.g.  use  of  crop  varieties  with  reduced  biological  cycle,  use  of 
water-resistant  crops),  by    modernising  the  existing  irrigation  infrastructure  but 
also  switching  to  more  efficient  and  sustainable  irrigation  systems  while  also 
providing appropriate training and advice services to farmers. 

6 

 
•  Contributing  to  the  Green  Deal  target  on  organic  farming  by  further 
increasing the area under organic farming through incentivising the maintenance 
and  conversion 
in  disadvantaged  and 
mountainous  areas  where  more  opportunities  for  quality  products  exist  and  by 
filling  research  and  innovation  gaps  in  organic  as  well  as  other  types  of  low-
impact farming. 

to  organic  agriculture,  especially 

•  Contributing to the EU Green Deal targets on biodiversity by increasing the 
share  of  landscape  features  in  agriculture  and  by  improving  the  status  of 
protected species and habitats, farmland birds and wild pollinators in line with the 
prioritized action framework for CAP funding and the species and habitats action 
plans,  thereby  achieving  biodiversity  and  climate  mitigation  and  adaptation 
benefits, as well as increased productivity from enhanced pollination and natural 
pest control. 

•  Contributing to climate change mitigation by encouraging carbon sequestration 
though carbon farming, the sustainable management of the existing forests as well 
as the timely replacement of harvested or damaged forest. This would maximise 
long-term carbon capture and increase the carbon sinks in forests, their soils and 
harvested wood products; support and implementation not only for afforestation, 
agroforestry  and  restoration  but  also  through  advice  on  species  selection  will 
contribute to this direction. 

introducing  water 

•  Strengthening  climate  change  adaptation  measures  including  awareness 
raising, 
flood 
prevention/protection.  In  addition,  still  in  the  interest  of  adaptation  to  high 
wildfire  risk,  a  forest  cadastre  and  the  review  of  the  legal  framework  for 
prevention and suppression of wildfires is recommended. 

investing 

efficient 

crops 

and 

in 

Strengthen the socio-economic fabric of rural areas and address societal demands 

•  Strengthening the  efforts to  meet  the  challenge of the generational  renewal  in 
agriculture by reducing the entry barriers in the sector, mainly as regards access 
to  land,  credit  through  appropriate  financial  instruments,  training  and  farm 
advisory  services  creating  thereby  a  favourable  environment  for  new  entrants, 
especially young farmers. 

•  Tackling  poverty,  unemployment,  employment  gender  gap  and  ageing 
population  and  contributing  to  improving  access  to  healthcare  in  rural  areas 
through  investments  in  economic  and  social  infrastructures  and  services.  The 
synergy of CAP tools with other Funds towards this direction should be ensured. 

•  In line with the Green Deal/ Farm  to Fork targets on pesticides,  monitoring 
and reducing the use and risk of pesticides by more sustainable farming practices, 
appropriate training and advice to farmers, taking action to decrease the use of the 
more  hazardous  pesticides  and  through  implementation  of  integrated  pest 
management. 

•  Whilst  its  sales  of  antimicrobials  are  below  the  EU  average,  Greece  should 
continue to implement measures to reduce its use of antimicrobials in agriculture, 
in  order  to  contribute  to  the  achievement  of  the  EU  Green  Deal  target,  for 

7 

 
example  by  promoting  best  practices  and  integrating  targets  into  concrete  and 
more ambitious CAP actions. 

•  In  line  with  the  Farm  to  Fork  Strategy,  putting  in  place  more  ambitious 
measures  to  support  farmers  to  improve  livestock  management  practices 
aiming  at  higher  animal  welfare,  especially  in  the  area  of  tail-docking,  laying 
hens  and  transport  of  animals,  as  well  as  better  farm  biosecurity,  disease 
prevention and control. 

Fostering and sharing of knowledge, innovation and digitalisation in agriculture and 
rural areas, and encouraging their uptake 

•  Accelerating the digital and green transition of the farming sector by investing  its 
Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System, focusing in particular on farm 
advice,  interactive  innovation,  and  training  to  increase  the  knowledge  level  and 
innovative  skills  of  farmers  and  advisors.  Implementation  of  recently  adopted 
national legislation as  regards farm advisory services as well as putting in place 
innovation support services are also essential to achieve this target. 

•  Contributing  to  the  EU  Green  Deal  target  on  broadband  by  substantially 
increasing  fast  broadband  infrastructure  coverage  via  targeted  investments  in 
synergy with other EU funds while promoting at the same time the development 
of digital skills in rural areas through appropriate training. 

8 

 
 
 
2.  ANALYSIS  OF  AGRICULTURE  AND  RURAL  DEVELOPMENT  IN 

GREECE 

Rural areas represent 63% of Greek territory with rural inhabitants representing a stable 
31% of the Greek population. Greek agriculture consists of about 700 000 farms, which 
are,  in  average,  rather  small  in  physical  size  (7.7  ha).  An  important  percentage  of  the 
Greek agricultural area is designated as area facing natural or other specific constraints, 
playing a role especially for sheep and goat farming. The sector employs approximately 
450 000 people, representing 12% of total employment.  

Unemployment in rural areas remains an issue, especially for young people. Greece has 
one  of  the  lowest  share  of  young  farmers  in  the  EU,  who  have  though  at  least  a  basic 
level of agricultural training. Greece has a positive trade balance with countries outside 
the EU, with the main export products to be cotton and agricultural processed products 
(e.g. olive oil and processed fruits and vegetables), while the trade balance with other EU 
countries is negative. However, the share of the value added for primary producers in the 
food  chain  is  increasing  over  time  in  Greece,  despite  the  low  degree  of  producer 
organisations.  

While  overall  status  of  nature  and  biodiversity  protection  seems  rather  satisfactory, 
important  issues  remain as  regards  the  management  of  natural  resources  especially  soil 
and water.  

2.1  Support  viable  farm  income  and  resilience  across  the  EU  territory  to 

enhance food security 

Greek  agricultural  entrepreneurial  income  per  worker  has  increased  from  63%  to  86% 
compared  to  average  wages  in  whole  economy  during  2006-2017,  well  beyond  the  EU 
average  (49%  in  2017)2,  which  demonstrates  the  resilience  of  farm  income  during  the 
economic crisis but also the substantial fall in average incomes.  

Greek agriculture consists of about 700 000 farms, which are, in average, rather small in 
physical  size  (7.7  hectares).  It  employs  a  full  time  equivalent  of  450  000  Annual 
Working Units, corresponding to 12% of the total labour force. Direct payments play a 
more  important  role  in  agricultural  factor  income  (32%)  than  on  average  in  the  EU 
(approximately 25%)3. The direct payment per hectare historically is higher for specific 
types  of  sectors  and  farming.  While  most  support  is  not  coupled  to  production 
requirements,  voluntary  coupled  support  is  significant  in  Greece,  representing  9.7%  of 
total direct payments in 2017. Coupled support was mostly granted to the sheep meat and 
goat meat sectors, followed by beef and veal and protein crops.  

The factor income broadly increases with physical farm size whereas the direct payment 
per hectare decreases2. This is also reflected in result indicator R6 (redistribution towards 
smaller  farms):  on  average  for  2015-2017,  farms  below  average  size  received  123%  of 
the average direct payment per hectare. However, there are still important differences in 
income between small to medium farms on one hand and large farms on the other hand. 
Income  increases  constantly  with  economic  farm  size  while  the  direct  payment  per 
hectare increases for the low-medium and decreases for higher economic sizes4.  

As  regards  the  basic  payment  scheme,  Greece  does  not  apply  the  flat  rate  model  but  a 
partial convergence by 2019 at regional level5. The unit amount per hectare varies greatly 
by individual farmer6, illustrating the still high link to old individual historic references, 

9 

 
which are increasingly difficult to justify. Greece applies also the small farmers scheme 
with a maximum payment of EUR 1 250 a year7.  

Factor income is above average for field crops and granivores, while their direct payment 
per hectare is lower than average, except for other field crops than cereals, oilseeds, and 
protein  crops,  for  which  it  is  significantly  higher  than  average8.    Income  is  on  average 
lower in the apiculture, olive sector and mixed crops and livestock sector9. It should be 
noted  that  the  direct  payment  per  hectare  is  lower  than  average  for  those  types  of 
farming.  

The granivore sector has been highly volatile during the period 2008-2017, but the factor 
income  has  been  highest  compared  to  other  livestock  sectors.  During  years  2013-2017, 
the  mixed  crops  and  livestock  sectors  and  the  apiculture  sector  have  faced  a  slight 
increase  in  farm  net  value  added  per  worker.  Amongst  the  different  crop  sectors,  the 
agricultural  factor  income  has  been  higher  for  cereal,  oilseed  and  protein  crop  farms 
during  2006-2017.  However,  the  sector  has  been  relatively  volatile  and  facing  a  slight 
downward  trend  during  2016-2017.  At  the  same  time,  the  factor  income  for  other  crop 
sectors has slightly increased with the horticulture sector being stable.  

78% of agricultural area is designated as area facing natural or other specific constraints 
(ANCs)  for  which  specific  ANC-payments  are  made,  totalling  22.6%  of  the  rural 
development budget. Agricultural factor income per worker is on average similar or even 
higher in areas with natural constraints compared to other areas10. However, it seems the 
situation  is  changing  in  the  last  years  of  observation  (income  in  mountain  areas  is 
converging  towards  non  ANC).  This  situation  differs  from  the  European  average  as 
generally areas not classified as facing constraints have the highest income per worker.  

Furthermore,  it  should  be  noted  that  a  significant  share  of  direct  payment  beneficiaries 
have an economic size lower than EUR 4 000 and that a significant proportion of them 
are self-consumption farms.  

The farm income variability in Greece over the period 2007-2013 is lower than the EU 
average  and  the  average  for  other  southern  European  countries11.  While  there  is  a 
compulsory crop insurance for climatic risks in Greece, there are no mutual funds for the 
crop  or  livestock  sectors.  Moreover,  farmers  do  not  use  forward  contracts  or  futures 
contracts in Greece, the only exception being forward contracts for dairy farms. 

10 

 
 
Income and direct payments by worker by physical size in Greece (hectares of UAA) 

Income other direct payments per AWU 
Other decouples direct payments per AWU 
Average income per worker 

Greening per AWU 
Coupled payments per AWU 
Share of direct payments in income 

U
W
A
/
R
U
E

Source: European Commission. Income support breakdown. Distribution of direct aid to farmers – 
indicative figures 2018 financial year. 

2.2  Enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness including greater 

focus on research, technology and digitalisation 

About  450  000  farmers  are  employed  in  Greek  agriculture,  corresponding  to  close  to 
12%  of  the  total  labour  force12.  The  agricultural  workforce  mainly  consists  of  farm 
owners  and  family  members.  Small-sized,  family-owned  dispersed  units  dominate  the 
agriculture structure with a continuous decline in the number of farms since 2007, from 
860 150 to  685 000 farms  between 2007  and 2016, with  the average farm size slightly 
increasing  from  5  to  8  hectares  during  the  same  time  period  (compared  to  15  ha  on 
average in the EU)13.  

National  legislation  related  to  land,  its  access  and  its  use  and  insufficient  public  and 
private investments in infrastructure impede the emergence of new farmers, contributing 
to Greece having one of the lowest shares of young farmers (3.7%) in the EU (5.1%)14. 
The total factor productivity (TFP) has increased since 2005 because of the increase of 
labour productivity mainly due to the outflow of labour (-28% between 2005 and 2017). 
Age structure, lack of investments and small farm size weigh on the land productivity of 
the  sector15,  and  the  low  level  of  cooperative  and  producer  organisations  make 
modernisation and knowledge transfer more difficult.  

In  disadvantaged  and  mountainous  areas,  agriculture  is  limited  to  extensive  production 
systems, which provide opportunities for organic, quality, regional-based products. With 
9.3% of the total utilised agricultural area under organic farming in 2018, Greece has a 
higher share of agricultural land under organic farming than the EU average (7.5%)16, but 
the  lack  of  available  data  on  the  value  of  production  under  quality  schemes  (including 
organics)  hampers  analysis  of  prospects.  However,  the  largely  extensive  production 
model  based  on  quality  and  regional  products  provides  a  good  basis  to  meet  the 
sustainability ambitions of the European Green Deal.  

Farm income in  real  prices was in  decline between 2003  and 2008, but  has  been fairly 
stable  since17.  Over  this  period,  crop  and  animal  output  revenues  and  labour  costs 
decreased while energy and feeding stuffs increased. As regards the reduction of animal 

11 

 
 
 
output revenues,  there is  a downward trend of the total  number of livestock units since 
200718.  

The trade balance for agricultural products was negative at EUR 657.4 million in 2018. 
Nevertheless,  in  recent  years  the  deficit  narrowed  and  exports  grew19.  Greece  has  a 
positive  trade  balance  with  countries  outside  the  EU,  but  the  intra-EU  trade  balance  is 
negative. Processed agricultural products, in particular, olive oil, cotton and preparations 
of nuts, fruits or vegetables, have a highly positive trade balance while commodities and 
other primary products, like meat products, have a high trade deficit20.  

The  capacity  for  innovation  of  the  Greek  economy  is  low  compared  to  other  Member 
States21.  This  weakness  is  accentuated  in  the  agricultural  sector  by  the  small  size  of 
farms, which have less capacity for investments and scale economy, and by the low level 
of training of farm managers22.  

Cost and revenue structure of agricultural income (real prices in million EUR) in Greece 

Crop output 

Agricultural services output 
Fertilisers 
Rents 
Entrepreneurial income 

Animal output 
Non-agricultural secondary 
Plant/animal protection 
Interest 

Product subsidies 
Seeds 
Feeding stuffs 

Taxes 

Source: EUROSTAT [aact_eaa01] 

Other subsidies 

Energy 
Labour 
Other costs 

2.3  Improve farmers' position in the value chain 

The  share  of  the  value  added  that  goes  to  agriculture  is  higher  in  Greece  than  the  EU-
average  (23%  in  2016)23.  In  2016,  51.5%  of  the  value  added  in  the  Greek  food  chain 
went  to  primary  producers.  In  addition,  the  share  of  the  value  added  for  primary 
producers in the food chain is increasing over time in Greece from 41% in 2008 to 51.5% 
in 2016, while the overall value added in the food chain has decreased in recent years.  

To be able to compete at the scale necessary on the internal and global markets creating 
higher  added  value  and  income  for  producers  and  agro-processors,  additional  focus  on 
developing  the  organic  sector  and  other  products  under  EU  quality  schemes  appears 
necessary.  In  total  Greece  has  recognised  281  protected  designations  of  origin  (PDOs), 
protected  geographical  indication  (PGIs),  traditional  speciality  guaranteed  (TSG)  and 
geographical indications (GIs). Still there are margins to further increase the participation 
of farmers in these Community and/or national quality schemes in order to increase scale 
and benefits. A more dynamic use of EU quality labels scheme could also be seen as a 

12 

 
 
response  to  consumers’  demand  for  high  quality  products  by  promoting  the  new 
participation of farmers to the recognised quality schemes, concentrating the production 
and  undertaking  promotional  activities,  including  on-line  or  light  ones  such  as 
networking. 

The  degree  of  organisation  of  Greek  farmers  in  producer  organisations,  including 
cooperatives,  is  low.  While  producer  organisations  are  developing,  with  aid  of  EU 
support  particularly  in  some  sectors,  their  market  power  is  sometimes  weakened  as 
individual members sell their products independently.  

Value added for primary producers in the food chain in Greece (in million EUR) 

Primary production 
Food and beverage consumer services 

Food and beverage manufacturing 
% for primary producers (right axis) 

Food and beverage distribution 
% for primary producers – EU-27 

Source: European Commission. CAP indicators – Data explorer. CAP Result indicator RPI_03 Value for 
primary producers in the food chain. 

2.4  Contribute  to  climate  change  mitigation  and  adaptation,  as  well  as 

sustainable energy 

In 2018, agricultural emissions of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in Greece amounted 
to 7.8 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents, up 2.5% since 2000, representing about 8% of 
total  GHG emissions in Greece and less than 2% of the total  EU GHG emissions from 
agriculture.  Between  2013  and  2018  GHG  emissions  decreased  by  7%  while  between 
1990  and  2018  by  as  much  as  23%.  46%  of  agricultural  emissions  in  Greece  relate  to 
enteric  fermentation  of  livestock  (mainly  sheep),  39%  to  agricultural  soils  (fertiliser), 
12% to the management of manure and 2% to rice cultivation24. Between 2013 and 2018, 
the GHG emissions from enteric fermentation decreased by 9%, the GHG from manure 
management  by  8%  and  the  GHG  emissions  from  soil  management  by  7%.  Net  CO2 
emissions from cropland and grassland are both negative meaning that they are a sink for 
CO2, with the sink capacity increasing in recent years. However, in Greece, the emissions 
from  cropland  were  limited  and  the  role  of  grassland  as  a  GHG  sink  was  limited 
compared to the total land use, land use change and forestry sector (LULUCF). Peatlands 
cover only 0.4% of soils in Greece25. 

The  share  of  agriculture  in  the  production  of  total  renewable  energy  in  Greece  is  low 
(6%), below the EU-27 average (12.14%), and it decreased by 4.5% between 2013 and 
2018,  compared  to  the  EU  average  growth  of  +0.13%)26.  Over  a  third  (36%)  of 
renewable  energy  production  came  from  forestry  sector,  bringing  the  contribution  of 
renewable energy production from agriculture and forestry in total energy production to 
about  12%.  In  Greece,  energy  consumption  in  agriculture  and  forestry  has  one  of  the 

13 

 
 
lowest  shares  in  total  final  energy  consumption  (1.6%)  in  the  EU.  Between  2013  and 
2018 the final energy consumption by agriculture/forestry in Greece declined by 11% to 
about  50  kgoe  per  hectare  of  agricultural  land27.  The  national  energy  and  climate  plan 
(NECP),  adopted  in  December  2019,  does  not  set  a  specific  reduction  target  for 
agriculture,  however,  it  mentions  measures  proposed  to  promote  biomass  for  energy 
production, sustainability certification scheme for biofuels, promotion of energy crops of 
woody  biomass  or  coppice  plantations  and  development  of  the  bioethanol  and 
biomethane  market.  Moreover,  Greece  is  considering  a  specific  package  of  policy 
measures aimed at improving energy efficiency in the agricultural sector, for example to 
improve  the  energy  efficiency  of  pumping  stations,  as  well  as  the  energy  upgrading  of 
agricultural  machinery  and  the  reduction  in  energy  consumption  in  greenhouses  and 
livestock farms. 

The  national  strategy  for  adaptation  to  climate  change28  places  particular  emphasis  on 
agriculture  and  forestry,  giving  priority  to  synergies  between  adaptation  and  mitigation 
actions  through  the  conservation  and  sustainable  use  of  soil  resources  and  land 
management practices. In some regions, the impacts of climate change are expected to be 
more  serious  (e.g.  Crete,  Aegean)  and  some  crops  will  face  more  negative  effects 
(vegetables,  olives,  maize).  For  a  large  part  of  the  country’s  agricultural  land  droughts 
are expected to become more severe due to climate change. 

The rural development programme (RDP) promotes a more intensified implementation of 
afforestation  to  increase  the  level  of  absorption  in  the  land  use,  land  use  change  and 
forestry (LULUCF) sector and it also supports prevention and restoration of damage to 
forest  arising  from  fires,  natural  disasters  and  other  catastrophic  events.  Moreover,  the 
RDP 2014-2020 supports actions in energy savings, water savings, organic farming, the 
prevention  of  the  effects  of  disasters  (including  unfavourable  climatic  phenomena)  and 
promotes  the  use  of  renewable  energy  sources  and  the  reduction  of  greenhouse  gas 
emissions as well as the cooperation for environmental practices (including emphasis on 
climate change/adaptation). 

The  removal  of  carbon  dioxide  emissions  (net  sink)  is  expected  to  continue  in  the 
LULUCF sector until 2040, with forests and forest areas playing the most important role 
in the entire sector with approximately 56% of total emissions/removals. This trend in the 
forest category is expected to continue in the period up until 2050. The national strategy 
for forests lays down the principles and guidelines of forestry policy for the period 2018-
2038,  adopting  the  ‘Mediterranean  forestry  model’  in  the  management  of  forest 
ecosystems,  adapted  to  biotic  and  abiotic  conditions  in  Greece  at  national  and  regional 
levels.  In  the  Strategy,  the  serious  impact  of  climate  change  on  forest  ecosystems  is 
stressed.  The  Mediterranean  forests  are  highly  likely  to  be  affected  by  the  average 
temperature  increase  of  2  –  4  °C  (for  Greece  3  -  4.5  °C),  and  the  reduction  of  the 
available water resources by a very large percentage. The National Strategy has already 
identified  the  evidence  of  the  impact  on  the  forest  ecosystems  of  Greece,  such  as 
deadlocks on forest boundaries, an increase in insect attacks, changes in the intensity and 
seasonality of forest fires, a reduction in the increase due to drought, changes in genetic 
make-up, etc29. Actions will be promoted for the assessment of the vulnerability of forest 
ecosystems to climate change, for management aiming at adapting forest ecosystems to 
climate change, for mitigating climate change by increasing carbon capture and storage 
in forest ecosystems and for addressing extreme phenomena (e.g. forest fires, pests and 
diseases, and prevention of flooding and water scarcity).  

14 

 
 
Total Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture (including and excluding LULUCF) in Greece (in 
million tonnes of CO2 equivalents) 

Grassland 

Cropland 
Agriculture 
% of agriculture in total GHG emissions (exc. LULUCF) 
% of agriculture (incl. emissions from cropland and grassland) in total GHG emissions (incl. LULUCF) 

EU-27 % of agriculture (incl. Emissions from cropland and grassland) in total GHG emissions (incl. LULUCF) 
Source: European Environmental Agency. EUROSTAT [env_air_gge] 

2.5  Foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural 

resources such as water, soil and air 

In  air  quality,  the  total  ammonia  emissions  in  Greece  are  decreasing  over  time,  in 
opposite trend than in the EU since 2013. 91% of the ammonia emissions in 2018 came 
from agricultural sources. The latest submitted emission projections indicate that Greece 
can achieve its national emission reduction commitments Directive targets for ammonia 
(reduction by -7% compared to the 2005 levels for all years 2020-2029 and by -10% by 
2030  and  beyond)30,  even  though  the  required  NAPCP  (national  air  pollution  control 
programme) has not been submitted yet with information on policies and measures to be 
implemented.  Data  show  that  livestock  contributes  more  than  crops  to  the  ammonia 
emissions from agriculture in Greece31.  

However, the fact that permanent grassland surfaces are increasing over time (to 39% of 
total  agricultural  area  in  2017,  from  16%  in  2010)32  has  a  positive  contribution  to  the 
overall GHG emissions trend. 

In contrast, soil quality is an issue in Greece. The share of agricultural area at risk of soil 
erosion  in  Greece  being  10.2%,  above  the  EU  average  (6.6%)33,  and  much  more 
important in north-west and southern parts of Greece34. Greece has an average soil loss 
rate by water of 4.1 t ha-1 yr-1 (EU mean is 2.5 t ha-1 yr-1)35.  Wind erosion is also an issue 
in the Aegean islands. The level of soil organic carbon stocks (183 mega Tonnes in 2015) 
and  mean  soil  organic  carbon  (16  g/kg  in  2015)  are  much  below  EU  the  average36. 
Specific  Mediterranean  characteristics  contribute  to  increased  risk  of  soil  erosion,  with 
rainfall  patterns  and  drought  leading  to  loss  of  soil  organic  matter  while  sloping  land, 
especially for pasture, increases the risk of soil erosion. The type of cultivated crops and 
other  management  practices  such  as  reduced  tillage,  cover  crops  and  agroforestry  can 
contribute  to  soil  protection.  51%  of  farmland  was  subject  to  crop  diversification  (EU 
average  is  77%)37,  with  10%  of  the  agricultural  land  being  under  rural  development 
contracts to improve soil38; in 2017, 61% of the 2023 target was reached39. Despite the 
above  efforts,  the  change  in  soil  characteristics  is  slow,  with  certain  support  measures 
(e.g.  for  areas  with  natural  constraints)  lacking  environmental  targeting.  In  the  future, 

15 

 
Greece can address these key issues in synergy with activities under the Horizon Europe 
mission on soil health.   

Water quality and quantity represent one of the biggest challenges for Greek agriculture. 
While  the  nitrogen  and  phosphorus  surpluses  in  Greece  are  decreasing  over  time40
,  the 
estimated N surplus was 59 kg/ha UAA/year in 201741
 and needs to be reduced to address 
the pernicious effects in the environment and in view of the Green Deal target to reduce 
nutrients  losses42.  As  regards  groundwater,  according  to  the  nitrates  Directive 
implementation report (2012-2015), 15.5% of the groundwater monitoring stations have 
concentrations  above  50mg/l  NO3.  This  nitrogen  surplus  has  to  be  seen  also  in 
combination  with  farm  intensity  coverage;  areas  with  low  input  intensity  per  hectare 
increased  between  2004  and  2016  from  26%  to  33.5%,  whereas  areas  with  high  input 
intensity remained stable at around 30% between 2004 and 201643. Water quality could 
also  have  been  hampered  by  the  increase  of  plant  protection  products  use,  since  an 
increase of 24% in their total sales was reported from 2014 to 2018. 

Irrigable areas represented 24% of the total farmland in Greece in 2016, with a 9% jump 
in  irrigation  use  between  2012-2015.  The  share  of  irrigation  in  total  water  abstraction 
decreased over time (79.7% in 2016 versus 82.9% in 2012)44, with the northern part of 
Greece  having  the  biggest  share  of  water  abstraction  for  irrigation  purposes  (however, 
data are missing for water use from streams, wells and ponds, which are very common). 
In addition, the total water abstraction in agriculture remains high over the last 20 years 
(9 067 100 103m3 in 2000, 8 961 160 103m3 in 2016)45. Water use targets (2023) for the 
2014-2020  rural  development  programme  stood  at  61%  for  water  management 
improvement and 87% for switching to more efficient irrigating systems46. Greece’s aim 
to improve water management at 17.5% of agricultural land and water efficiency for 5% 
of  irrigated  land  through  irrigation  infrastructures  is  hampered  by  lack  of  appropriate 
that  were  not  properly 
training  and  advisory  services 
implemented47.  As  a  result,  the  potential  to  contribute  to  better  water  quality  though 
better  management  and  efficiency  is  not  fully  exploited,  even  though  important  steps 
have been taken. 

to  farmers,  measures 

16 

 
 
 
Potential surplus of N and P on agricultural land in Greece 

Potential surplus of nitrogen on agricultural land (in kg N/ha/year) 

Potential surplus of phosphorus on agricultural land (in kg P/ha/year) 
EU-27 GNB for Nitrogen 

Source: European Commission. CAP context indicator C.40 Water quality. 
Based on EUROSTAT [aei_pr_gnb] 

2.6  Contribute  to  the  protection  of  biodiversity,  enhance  ecosystem  services 

and preserve habitats and landscapes 

The Farmland Bird Index in Greece decreased overtime (100 in 2007 versus 64 in 2013), 
but recovered to 97 in 2016, being above the EU average (82 in 2016). In 2012, 38% of 
grassland  was  in  a  favourable  status,  the  rest  being  in  an  unfavourable-inadequate 
conservation  status.  Greece  has  developed  Natura  2000  management  plans  and 
accompanying  legal  tools  but  very  few  have  been  formally  adopted  and  implemented. 
The  main  causes  of  biodiversity  loss  in  Greece  relate  to  past  and  current  policies  on 
unsustainable  land  use,  agriculture,  fisheries,  transport,  tourism  (especially  coastal), 
production and consumption patterns and climate change.  

Pressures  stemming  from  agricultural  practices  affect  the  majority  of  relevant  habitat 
types, but mostly water ecosystems, and are associated with agricultural runoff, drainage, 
change of land use and of natural succession, pumping of groundwater, surface water and 
mixed water. Though in recent years there is a slight upsurge in traditional farming, the 
overall  tendency  of  intensive  and  large-scale  monocrop  agriculture  puts  significant 
pressure  on  natural  resources,  namely  water  (scarcity  and  pollution)  and  soil  (erosion, 
low soil organic carbon and pollution). It also has negative impacts on the landscape and 
leads to habitat fragmentation.  

In Greece, 2.8% of agricultural area is fallow land (lower than the EU average of 4.1%) 
while 0.2% is landscape elements (also lower than the EU average of 0.5%). 
Forests,  mostly  state-owned,  cover  approximately  30%  of  the  land  area48,  but  they  are 
prone  to  major  forest  fires.  Forest  products  make  no  significant  contribution  to  the 
economy. 

The  total  area  under  organic  farming  (certified  and  under  conversion)  fell  in  Greece 
between 2012 and 2016 to about 343 000 hectares but has since increased. With 10% of 
area  under  organic  farming  in  2019,  Greece  is  above  the  EU-27  average,  and  the  area 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
under conversion as share of total UAA is also increasing49, showing a good potential for 
growth towards the EU level Green Deal target of 25% of agricultural land by 2030. The 
fluctuations  in  the  Greek  organic  area  may  be  linked  to  the  sharp  fall  in  disposable 
incomes in Greece recent years and highlight the importance of ensuring development of 
supply and demand in parallel. The number of organic producers increased from 23 448 
in 2012 to 29 594 in 201850. The share of animals held by organic farmers increased from 
2011 to 2013 and is significantly higher compared to the EU average51. 

On  biodiversity,  according  to  Article  17  of  the  habitats  Directive  and  Article  12  of  the 
birds Directive reports (reference in the prioritised action framework), a large number of 
habitat types and species included in the habitats and birds Directives face pressures and 
threats  related  to  agricultural  activities.  Agriculture  has  also  been  recognised  as  a  high 
pressure/threat for 31 habitat types, 73 habitats Directive species, and 59 bird Directive 
birds, thus requiring urgent conservation measures to mitigate the effects. 

The prioritised action framework (PAF) of Greece identifies the following needs: foster 
the  management  of  the  Natura  2000  sites,  priorities  for  grasslands  both  within  and 
outside Natura 2000 sites (example regulation of access (e.g. vehicle traffic), restoration 
and improvement of habitats of the orchid Dactylorhiza kalopissii, Anser erythropus and 
Vipera ursinii) and for other agricultural habitats, increasing agricultural biodiversity and 
improvement/conservation of associated avifauna, increases in hedgerows, promotion of 
organic agriculture and agri-environmental measures in Natura 2000 sites with lakes and 
rivers,  installation  of  agro-forestry  systems,  and  improvement  of  habitats  for  terrestrial 
fauna-stone walls, terraces, etc. 

The above should go hand in hand with not funding investments and farming practices, 
which  have  a  negative  impact  on  Natura  2000  sites  and  beyond  by  defining  ambitious 
Good Agricultural and Environment Conditions (GAEC) requirement on biodiversity and 
applying fully the Statutory Management Requirements from the Nature directives. 

During the RDP approval 2014-2020, the Greek authorities have made a commitment to 
advance  considerably  on  the  Natura  2000  management  plan  front  –  and  committed  to 
introduce a grassland management measure for Natura 2000 areas, under measure 10 or 
measure 12. Those efforts should continue. About 30% of the N2000 terrestrial surface is 
agricultural  land.  Thus,  the  key  vector  of  agricultural  development,  the  CAP  Strategic 
Plan,  has  a  key  role  to  play  in  integrating  biodiversity  requirements  to  rural  and 
agricultural development. 

18 

 
 
 
Area under organic farming in Greece 

Hectares under organic farming 

% of agricultural area under organic farming 

% of area under organic farming in the 
EU-27 

Source: European Commission. CAP context indicator C.19 Agricultural area under organic farming. 
Based on EUROSTAT [org_cropar_h1] and [org_cropar] 

Share of agricultural area covered by high-diversity landscape 
features in the EU 

Fallow land as % of agricultural area 

Landscape features as % of agricultural area* 

Source: Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Based on EUROSTAT for land 
laying fallow and Joint Research Center based on LUCAS survey for estimation of landscape elements. 
* Linear elements considered here: Grass margins, shrub margins, single trees bushes, lines of trees, 
hedges and ditches. This estimation is to be taken with caution because of methodological caveats. 

2.7  Attract young farmers and facilitate business development in rural areas 

Greece has one of the lowest share of young farmers (3.7%) in 2016 in the total number 
of farm managers below the EU-27 average (5.1%), and this share decreased by 44.3% 
from  2005  to  2016.  Despite  a  slight  change  of  trend  during  the  economic  crisis,  the 
decline in the proportion of young farmers continues, and farm managers older than 55 
years old increased from 55% in 2010 to 61% in 201652, 53. At the same time, the number 
of female farmers remains very low in  Greece.  The ratio of  young female managers to 
male managers decreased from 1:3 in 2005 to 1:4 in 2016. This poses a serious challenge 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
for generation renewal due to the fact that many farmers do not have natural successors. 
The shortage of young farmers is especially prevalent in mountainous areas. 

The  average  farm  managed  by  young  farmers  is  bigger  in  comparison  to  all  other  age 
groups, in terms of both agricultural land and potential production value in 2016. Young 
farmers  tend  to  have  the  biggest  farms  compared  to  older  farm  managers  who  have 
reached the end of their working life. With most of land used by young farmers bought 
from relatives when they retire, access to land is the biggest obstacle for young people. 
Land  mobility  is  hampered  by  rigidities  in  the  distribution  of  direct  payments  and 
obstacles stemming from national legislation on property rights also creates difficulties in 
access to land for young farmers. The share of farm managers below 35 years old with at 
least a basic level of agricultural training (20%) in 2013 was higher than the one in 2010 
(16%). 

Young farmers in Greece are also constrained in accessing finance. This can be explained 
by their lack of credit history, lack of collateral, the banks’ perception of young farmers 
as high-risk clients, and the banks’ risk aversion towards financing farmers, resulting in a 
much lower chance of receiving loans compared to their older peers. The share of viable 
young farmers with  rejected applications  in  2017 is  43% and the share  of farmers who 
were discouraged from applying is 19%. For younger farmers, the absence of own equity 
raises  further  challenges.  In  general,  new  entrants  or  young  farmers  who  take  over  a 
large-sized  farm  with  diversified  agriculture  activities  are  considered  to  be  more  credit 
worthy  and  to  have  better  access  to  financing.  Young  farmers  who  take  over  an 
established  family  business  have  a  far  better  chance  of  accessing  credit  than  any  other 
new  entrant.  Young  farmers  and  new  entrants  often  turn  to  private  sources.  Private 
financing in terms of ‘friends, family and business partners’ may account for anywhere 
between 19% and 40% of financing. The main requested purpose for finance in Greece 
by young farmers is working capital (80%)54. 

Greece  dedicated  EUR  16  million  to  the  young  farmer  payment  in  2016,  0.85%  of  the 
envelope  for  direct  payments.  In  addition  to  the  installation  grant  for  young  farmers 
under  rural  development,  EU  funds  dedicated  to  young  farmers  per  year  in  Greece 
amount to about EUR 55 million, representing 2.91% of the envelope for direct support 
in 2016. By the end of 2019, more than 15 000 young farmers received average support 
of about EUR 17 200 from rural development funds. Greece also earmarked 5.9% of the 
rural development budget for business development plans for young farmers aid55. 

While young farmers could bring innovative ideas and are better able to work with digital 
technologies and precision farming methods than the older ones, they are faced with the 
complexities of claiming financial support and meeting the conditions of policies, which 
may diminish their scope for truly innovative entrepreneurship, especially since fast and 
ultra-fast broadband are not available everywhere and  farm advisory needs are not well 
supported. 

20 

 
 
 
Share of farm managers < 35 years by gender in Greece 

Share of male farm managers below 35 years 

Share of female farm managers < 35 years 

Share of farm managers below 35 years – EU-27 

Ratio < 35 y.o />= 55 y.o. (right axis) 

Source: EUROSTAT [ef_m_farmang] 

2.8  Promote  employment,  growth,  social  inclusion  and  local  development  in 

rural areas, including bio-economy and sustainable forestry 

Rural  areas  represent  63%  of  Greek  territory56,  compared  to  45%  EU-27,  with  rural 
inhabitants representing 31%57 of the Greek population (with a decreasing trend, as per 
data  during  years  2005-2019)  -  future  demographic  trends  suggest  risk  of  further 
shrinking  in  rural  population.  Ageing  population  is  increasing58  with  Greek  rural  areas 
(though at a lower rate than urban areas) having one of the highest proportion of elderly 
people (24%) in the EU.  Unemployment in rural areas remains an issue, especially for 
young people. During 2013-2017, Greece recorded the highest rate of unemployment in 
rural  areas with more than one fifth of the active population (between 15-64  years old) 
unemployed59. The unemployment rate was much higher (more than 45%) for the young 
active population (15-24 years old). The respective EU average for the same period was 
8.7%  (15-64  years  old)  and  18.6%  (15-24  years  old).  Greece  has  the  highest 
unemployment rates in EU but it showed, pre-COVID crisis, signs of recovery. 

Although the employment rate (almost 60% in 2019)60 in Greece in predominantly rural 
areas  was  increasing  recently  (and  it  is  higher  than  the  general  employment  rate  in 
Greece), it remains well below the EU average. In 2018, a gender gap61 of about 26% and 
25%  existed  between  employment  in  males  and  females  in  lower  secondary  and 
upper/post-secondary  education,  respectively.  The  employment  gender  gap  is  smaller 
(9%) among employees with tertiary education.  Moreover, the total GDP per capita in 
predominantly  rural  areas  is  60%62  of  the  EU-average  (without  much  fluctuation  since 
2011) – the same trend applies to the total GDP per capita in Greece.  

Agriculture plays a significant role in the Greek bio-economy, representing the second-
highest contributor (33%)63 of turnover and contributes the majority of employees (more 
than 75%) in the bio-economy sector. In 2015, the share of agriculture in production of 
renewable energy64 was 4.7% (EU-28: 11.7%) but its average annual growth rate during 
2013-2015 was 32.9% (a lot higher than the EU-28: 6.5%). For the respective period, the 
share of forestry in production of renewable energy was 36.1% (EU-28:  44.6%) and its 
average  annual  growth  rate  5.6%  (higher  than  EU-28:  1.2%).  In  forestry,  although  the 
persons employed have increased from 2005 to 2017 (from approximately 5000 to 10000 

21 

 
 
annual working units)65, the gross value added per employee has decreased. Greece has 
the lowest output of forestry (2017) in the EU66. 

The rural poverty rate in Greece increased in recent  years and is above the EU average 
for  rural  areas.  Rural  poverty  rate  (around  35%)67  demonstrated  an  upward  trend  from 
2011  but  has  been  stable  since  2014  although  higher  than  the  national  average  poverty 
rate. Additionally, Third-Country migrants are at higher risk of poverty compared to EU 
migrants, taking into account the poverty levels of Greek citizens68. The financial burden 
of healthcare is higher in Greek rural areas when compared to cities, towns and suburbs 
(2017 data: 18%)69 and also higher than the EU average. 

As  concerns  digital  skills,  Greece  remains  below  the  EU  average,  with  particular 
challenges  in  people  from  disadvantaged  backgrounds,  including  refugees  and  asylum 
seekers, and those living in remote and rural areas70.   

In recent years, LEADER has successfully brought local actors together and allowed for 
the development of local governance capacities, enabling the rural development policy to 
play  an  important  role  in  promoting  a  more  inclusive  society  and  making  rural  areas  a 
better place to live. Since 2015 (approval of the RDP 2014-2020), Community-led local 
development is carried out via 50 local programmes developed by Local Action Groups, 
at  regional  level.  More  than  4  million  rural  inhabitants  benefit  from  LEADER  (as  per 
RDP  indicator)71.  Integration  of  the  CAP  priorities,  including  Green  Deal  targets  (e.g. 
reduction of gas emissions), Farm to Fork Strategy and Digitalisation (e.g. by enhancing 
the Smart Village approach), might be considered under LEADER.   

2.9  Improve  the  response  of  EU  agriculture  to  societal  demands  on  food  and 
health,  including  safe,  nutritious  and  sustainable  food,  as  well  as  animal 
welfare 

The  sales  of  plant  protection  products  has,  with  annual  variations,  increased  in  recent 
years.  As  regards  the  trends  in  harmonised  risk  indicator  (HRI1),  Greece  is  better  than 
the EU average (59 in 2018; figure 1)72 showing a 41% decrease to the three year average 
baseline against an EU reduction of 17%; however the use of more hazardous pesticides 
remains  high.  Greece  adopted  its  first  national  action  plan  for  the  sustainable  use  of 
pesticides for the 2014-18 period. However, this plan was not reviewed within five years 
as  required,  and  progress  made  in  meeting  the  targets  was  not  monitored.  Limited 
coordination  and  insufficient  cooperation  among  the  authorities  responsible  for  the 
implementation  of  the  Directive  on  sustainable  uses  resulted  in  inefficiencies  in 
executing  the  provisions  of  the  national  action  plan,  thus  preventing  Greece  from  fully 
achieving  objectives.  In  particular,  there  was  no  system  in  place  for  the  collection  of 
empty plant protection products containers and the implementation of measures to protect 
the  aquatic  environment  had  not  been  verified.  Efforts  have  been  made  to  promote 
initiatives  aimed  at  encouraging  the  implementation  of  integrated  pest  management, 
training  and  certification  of  professional  users  of  plant  protection  products  and  to 
establish a system for the inspection of pesticide application equipment73. 

The  sales  of  veterinary  antimicrobial  agents  in  Greece  for  2018  are  below  the  EU-27 
average of 118.3 mg/PCU of active ingredient. Still, they show a marked increase over 
the  period  2015-2018  (see  figure  below)74.  The  Green  Deal  target  at  EU  level  is  an 
overall 50% reduction in sales of antimicrobials for farmed animals and in aquaculture by 

22 

 
203075,  to  which  a  significant  Greek  contribution  is  expected  by  reversing  this  upward 
trend in sales. 

Based on the last audit report on animal welfare and transport, inspections on means of 
transport  and  animals  are  being  carried  out,  but  due  to  resource  constraints,  these  still 
focus almost exclusively on controls at slaughterhouses, which is not fully in accordance 
with  the  central  competent  authorities'  obligations.  Competent  authorities  are  not 
carrying out satisfactory checks of animal welfare during transport as the standard of the 
reporting at slaughterhouses was variable and undermines the efficacy of these controls 
carried  out  by  the  official  veterinaries76.  In  addition,  tail  docking  of  pigs  remains  a 
widespread  practice  while  routine  tail  docking  is  forbidden  by  EU  legislation.  The 
majority  of  the  egg  production  (77%)  is  still  in  cage  systems  and  alternative  systems 
could be promoted. 

Biosecurity is equally a challenge, considering that Greece is among the countries at high 
risk  from  African  Swine  Fever  (ASF)  where  farms  with  low  biosecurity  and  poor 
controls  pose  higher  risk  for  animal  disease  infections  and  spread.  Therefore,  strong 
action  is  needed  to  establish,  revise/upgrade  biosecurity,  registration  of  farms,  animal 
identification and animal movements. 

Consumption of individual food items make up dietary patterns. The diet of Crete in the 
mid-20th century, similar to the Mediterranean diet, was largely plant-based and was low 
in  red meat  (average intake of red meat  and poultry  combined was 35 g/day)77. Greeks 
had one of the longest life expectancies at the time61. Today’s diet in Greece has changed 
as  compared  to  the  traditional  dietary  pattern.  Greece  carries  a  high  burden  from  non-
communicable  diseases  due  to  dietary  risk  factors  expressed  as  disability-adjusted  life 
years (DALYs) per 100 000 population attributable to diet78. A number of dietary factors 
influence the DALY value.  A significant  part of the Greek population  is overweight  or 
obese,  at  levels  above  the  EU-27  average79.  Also,  Greece  has  a  high  estimated 
consumption of red meat80. Greece is below, but relatively close to the recommended 400 
grams  a  day  of  fruit  and  vegetables,  at  359  g/day81.  Efforts  should  focus  on  shifting 
towards  healthy  sustainable  diets,  in  line  with  national  recommendations  in  order  to 
contribute  to  reducing  overweight  and  obesity  rates  and  the  incidence  of  non-
communicable  diseases  while  simultaneously  improving  the  overall  environmental 
impact of the food system. This would include more plant-based diets with less red and 
processed meat and more fruits  and vegetables,  whole  grains,  nuts,  seeds and legumes. 
Concerning  food  loss  and  waste  in  primary  production  and  processing,  no  data  is  yet 
available. The National Waste  

Prevention  Strategic  Plan  (2014-2020)82  does  not  pay  attention  to  food  loss  and  waste 
occurring at those early stages of the supply chain. 

23 

 
 
 
 
Sales of veterinary antimicrobial agents marketed 
mainly for food-producing animals in Greece 

Harmonised Risk Indicator 1 for pesticides in Greece 
(2011-2013 = 100) 

Sales in mg/PCU 

EU-27 

HRI 1 

HRI 1 for EU-27 

Source: DG AGRI after ESVAC, Tenth ESVAC Report (2020)             Source: EUROSTAT [aei_hri]  

2.10  Cross-cutting objective on knowledge, innovation and digitalisation 

The  Greek  agricultural  knowledge  and  innovation  system  (AKIS)  is  highly  fragmented 
with actors at national and local level having very little connection. It was also assessed 
weak in the 2014 Pro-AKIS study, meaning that very little financing was made available 
for  AKIS.  Additionally,  the  re-organisation  of  research  and  farmers’  training  from  the 
Ministry  into  semi-autonomous  organisations  leads  to  extremely  weak  linkages  among 
the  main  public  AKIS  components.  Agricultural  Research  and  Innovation  (R&I)  is 
characterised by a high concentration of research and competencies in universities, with 
little  or  no  interest  in  the  needs  of  farmers  and  insufficient  interest  from  the  private 
sector, due to difficult access to finance. 

As  regards  research  and  innovation  infrastructures,  there  is  only  one  main  applied 
research  institute  interacting  with  other  R&I  infrastructures  and  actors83,  but  largely 
insufficient with advisors or farmers.  

Under the programming period 2014-2020, Greece programmed almost 5% of the rural 
development  (RD)  funding  for  knowledge  transfer  and  information  actions  (M1), 
advisory  services,  farm  management,  farm  relief  services  (M2)  and  cooperation-EIP 
(M16), well above the EU average of 3.63%84. The current spending until second quarter 
2020 however is  only 20% for M1, 0% for M2 and 0% for M16, indicating significant 
delays that probably will lead to severe under-implementation of the planned amounts85. 
The  Greek  rural  development  programme  (RDP)  aimed  at  creating  around  67  500 
training  places  for  farmers  and  other  rural  businesses  and  supporting  285  cooperation 
projects under the framework of the European Innovation Partnership (EIP).  

As  regards  cooperation  for  innovation,  there  are  no  officially  submitted  EIP-Operation 
Groups  by  the  management  authority  of  Greece  to  the  Commission,  since  the  measure 
under the Greek RDP was only recently activated. Implementation of the RDP measure 
on advisory services, farm management and farm relief services is lagging even further 
behind  since  it  has  not  yet  been  activated.  In  2016,  the  number  of  farm  managers  that 
attained basic or full training was 7% (for managers under 35 the share was 24%), which 
is below the EU average86. The implementation progress of the RDP indicates that up to 
2019, the number of participants trained was 10  456, meaning that only  15.49% of the 

24 

 
 
2023 target was reached. In addition, this percentage seems to be stagnating since 2017 
(already 10 350 participants at that time).  

The national rural network has organised some activities connecting research actors such 
as  universities  and  partners  of  Horizon  2020  projects  with  farmers,  advisors  and  rural 
businesses.  This  experience  can  be  the  basis  for  the  future  national  CAP  network  to 
intensify such actions and play a key role in promoting synergies between the CAP and 
European Research Area (ERA).  The best way to do so is to keep in close touch with the 
Horizon Europe National contact point and to intensify the dissemination of information 
on  the  EIP  website.  Moreover,  when  collecting  and  sharing  information,  the  CAP  can 
finance  interventions  that  help  to  make  use  of  up-to-date  scientific  information  for 
agricultural  practices,  for  instance  through  the  CAP  network  and  its  knowledge 
platforms,  and  by  setting  up  advisory  back-offices  where  the  latest  knowledge  and 
innovation is collected and shared with the field advisors and the farmers. 

Greece ranks 26th out of 27 EU Member States in the 2020 digital economy and society 
index (DESI)87, showing a limited improvement of its performance despite an increase in 
its overall score. However, the percentage of individuals with at least basic digital skills 
is over 50%. On connectivity, Greece is progressing at a very high pace in fast broadband 
(Next Generation Access (NGA)) coverage but remains below EU average. The overall 
fixed broadband take-up is still progressing slowly, reaching 76% (below the EU average 
of 78%)88.  

Broadband  coverage  is  still  limited  in  rural  areas  across  Greece  since  it  depends 
significantly on the extent of the territory to be covered, the population  density and the 
difficulty  in  developing  the  necessary  infrastructures  in  certain  regions.  In  2019,  more 
than  98%89  of  households  in  Greek  rural  areas  benefit  from  fixed  broadband  coverage, 
which is above EU average. More than 40% of households in Greek rural areas benefit 
from NGA broadband, which is below 59% of EU average. Greece has one of the lowest 
NGA  broadband  coverage  of  rural  area  in  the  EU,  making  it  difficult  for  businesses  to 
thrive and resulting in unattractive environment, especially in remote and less populated 
rural areas, poorly integrated in knowledge-based economy. Efforts to overcome the low 
NGA coverage have not materialised. 

In addition, Greece has not yet opted for the use of satellite-based means to monitor CAP 
implementation but governmental organisations are currently part of EU projects dealing 
with the uptake of new technologies for the modernisation of CAP administrations, CAP 
controls and interactions with farmers. 

A  lack  of  combined  performance  of  advisors,  agricultural  training,  researchers  and 
farmers organisations largely accounts for the underperformance of AKIS in Greece, in 
turn affecting the achievement of the targets of all priorities for the CAP. There is also a 
need  for  impartial  advisors  with  sufficient  digital  knowledge  and  of  access  to  data  in 
order  to  accelerate  the  smart,  green  and  digital  transition  in  agriculture  in  Greece  and 
avoid the digital divide. This should better interlink actors and organisations/institutions 
(users  and  producers  of  knowledge  and  innovation)  bridging  the  gap  between  research 
and practice.                        

25 

 
 
 
 
Agricultural training of farm managers below 35 years (left) and total farm manager population (right) in 
Greece 

Managers with full 
agricultural 
training 

Managers with 
basic agricultural 
training 

Full training EU 
average 

Basic training 
EU average 

Source: European Commission. CAP context indicator C.24 Agricultural training of farm managers. Based 
on EUROSTAT [ef_mp_training] 

Broadband coverage in Greece 

NGA broadband (% of rural households) 

Broadband access (% of rural households) 

NGA broadband (% of total households) 

Source: European Commission. Digital Economy and Society Index. DESI individual indicators – 1b1 Fast 
BB (NGA) coverage [desi_1b1_fbbc] 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1   JRC  PESETA  IV  Project:  Analysis  of  climate  change  impacts  on  EU  agriculture  by  2050: 

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/pesetaiv_task_3_agriculture_final_report.pdf  

2   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. CAP context indicators C.25 Agricultural 
factor income and CAP context indicator C.26 Agricultural entrepreneurial income. Income based on 
EUROSTAT [aact_eaa04], [aact_ali01] and [aact_eaa06], adding back the compensation of employees 
to the entrepreneurial income and divided by the total number of annual working units. Note: 2019 data 
estimated. The Average wage in the economy based on EUROSTAT [nama_10_a10_e] thousand hours 
worked using employees domestic concept and [nama_10_a10], item wages and salaries. 

3   European Commission. CAP indicators – Data explorer. CAP Result indicator RPI_01 Share of direct 

support in agricultural income. 

4   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Own calculations based on FADN (Farm 
Accountancy  Data  Network)  data  (up  to  2018)  and  CATS  (Clearance  of  Accounts  Trailing  System) 
data (up to 2018).  

5   European Commission. Summary report on the implementation of direct payments [except greening] – 

Claim year 2017. Section III.1.The models of basic payment after the 2013 CAP reform, page 8. 

6   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Own calculations based on FADN (Farm 
Accountancy  Data  Network)  data  (up  to  2018)  and  CATS  (Clearance  of  Accounts  Trailing  System) 
data (up to 2018). 

7   Greece: Policy Factsheet 2019 European Commission. The Small Farmers Scheme. Dates and amounts 

fixed by Member States for the SFS, page 10. 

8   FADN  standard  reports  Farm  Accountancy  Data  Network.  FADN  Standard  reports.  Report 

YEAR.COUNTRY.TF14 and own calculations (up to 2018). 

9   Farm Accountancy Data Network. FADN Standard reports. Report YEAR.COUNTRY.TF14 and own 

calculations (up to 2018).  

10   Farm  Accountancy  Data  Network.  FADN  Standard  reports.  YEAR.COUNTRY.ANC3  and  own 

calculations (up to 2018).  

11   European Commission.  CAP  indicators  – Data explorer. CAP Result indicator RPI_02 Variability of 

farm income. 

12   European Commission. CAP indicators – Data explorer. CAP Result indicator RPI_01 Share of direct 

support in agricultural income. 

13   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.17  Agricultural  holdings  (farms).  Based  on 

EUROSTAT [ef_kvaareg]  

14   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.24 Agricultural training of farm managers. Based on 

EUROSTAT [ef_mptrainman]  

15   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.27  Total factor  productivity.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[aact_eaa05], [aact_eaa04], [aact_ali01], [apro_cpsh1] and [ef_mptenure] and FADN.  

16   EUROSTAT [org_cropar]  
17   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.25 Agricultural factor income. Based on EUROSTAT 

[aact_eaa04], [aact_ali01] and [aact_eaa06] 

18   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.21  Livestock  units.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[ef_lsk_main], [ef_lsk_poultry], [ef_lsk_bovine] and [ef_lus_main] 

19   European  Commission.  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  –  Country  Report  Greece  2020. 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
page 

SWD(2020) 
final, 
content/EN/TXT/?qid=1584543810241&uri=CELEX%3A52020SC0507 

507 

57. 

20   Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development based on COMEXT. 
21   Hollanders  H.,  European  Innovation  Scoreboard  2020,  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union, 

Luxembourg, 2020, page 7. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/42981 

22   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.24 Agricultural training of farm managers. Based on 

EUROSTAT [ef_mptrainman]  

23   European  Commission.  CAP  indicators  –  Data  explorer.  CAP  Result  indicator  RPI_03  Value  for 

primary producers in the food chain 

24   European Environment  Agency European Environmental  Agency (EEA). EEA greenhouse gas  – data 

viewer. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/data-viewers/greenhouse-gases-viewer 

25   https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ESDB_Archive/octop/Resources/Peatland_Per_Country.pdf 
26   EUROSTAT [NRG_CB_RW]   
27   EUROSTAT 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Agri-

environmental_indicator_-_energy_use  

28   adopted by means of Law 4414/20 

27 

 
 
                                                 
 
29   Forestry Development Strategy 2018-2038, OD.170195/758/ΦΕΚ5351Β/28.11.2018 
30   European  Environmental  Agency  (EEA).  National  Emission  Ceilings  Directive  emission  data  viewer 

1990-2018.  
https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/national-emission-ceilings-nec-directive-inventory-17 
31   European  Environmental  Agency  (EEA).  National  Emission  Ceilings  Directive  emission  data  viewer 

1990-2018.  
https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/national-emission-ceilings-nec-directive-inventory-17 
32   European  Commission.  CAP  indicators  –  Data  explorer.  CAP  Result  indicator  RPI_12  Share  of 

grassland in total UAA.  

33   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.42  Soil  erosion  by  water.  Original  source:  Joint 

Research Center  

34   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.42  Soil  erosion  by  water.  Original  source:  Joint 

Research Center  

35   European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document – The EU Environmental Implementation 
final.  

SWD(2019) 

Greece. 

138 

Reveiew 
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eir/pdf/report_el_en.pdf 

Country 

Report 

2019 

36   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.41 Soil organic matter in arable land. Joint Research 

Center (JRC) based on LUCAS Land Use Survey 2015 

37  European  Commission,  DG  Agriculture  and  Rural  Development  analysis  based  on  Member  States’ 

notifications pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 

38   European  Commission.  CAP  indicators  –  Data  explorer.  CAP  Result  indicator  R.10  Percentage  of 
agricultural land under management contracts to improve soil management  and/or prevent soil erosion 
(focus area 4C) 

39   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development 
40   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.40 Water quality. Based on EUROSTAT [aei_pr_gnb] 
and European Environmental Agency as in Waterbase – Water Quality, CSI020, based on data reported 
to EIONET 

41   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.40 Water quality. Based on EUROSTAT [aei_pr_gnb] 
and European Environmental Agency as in Waterbase – Water Quality, CSI020, based on data reported 
to EIONET 

42   Greece is not participating in the data collection of gross nutrient balances 
43   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.33  Farming  intensity.  Based  on  FADN  –Agri-

environmental indicator “Intensification/Extensification” 

44   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.39  Water  abstraction  in  agriculture.  Based  on 

EUROSTAT [env_wat_abs] 

45   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.39  Water  abstraction  in  agriculture.  Based  on 

EUROSTAT [env_wat_abs] 

46   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development based on 

latest adopted version of the Rural Development Programme  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/key_policies/documents/rdp-factsheet-
greece_en.pdf  

47   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development 
48   Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global Forest Resources Assessment. 

https://fra-platform.herokuapp.com/GRC/assessment/fra2020/extentOfForest/  

49   EUROSTAT [org_cropar]  
50   Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL, Organic producers 

https://statistics.fibl.org/europe/key-indicators-
europe.html?tx_statisticdata_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=Element2Item&cHash=511759e872156740d7cfc
bda7f290481 

51   EUROSTAT [org_cropar] 
52  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.23  Age  structure  of  farm  managers.  Based  on 

EUROSTAT [ef_m_farmang] 
53   EUROSTAT [ef_m_farmang] 
54   fi-compass, 2020, Financial needs in the agriculture and agri-food sectors in Greece, Study report 
55   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development  
56   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.03 territory. Based on EUROSTAT [urt_d3area] 
57   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.01 population. Based on EUROSTAT [urt_gind3] 
58   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.02 age structure. Based on Eurostat [urt_pjanaggr3] 

28 

 
                                                                                                                                                 
 
 
 
 
 
 
59  European  Commission.  CAP  context 

indicator  C.07  unemployment.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[lfst_r_urgau] 

60  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.06  employment  rate.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[lfst_r_ergau] 

61  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.08  GDP  per  capita.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[lfst_r_erednu] 

62   Source: EUROSTAT [urt_10r_3gdp] 
63   DATAM bio economy, JRC 

https://datam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datam/mashup/BIOECONOMICS/index.html 

64   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.43  climate  change:  production  of  renewable  energy 

from agriculture and forestry 

65   Source: Eurostat [for_awu] 
66   Source: Eurostat [nama_10_a64] 
67   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.09 poverty rate. Based on EUROSTAT [ilc_peps13] 
68   Natale, F., Kalantaryan, S., Scipioni, M., Alessandrini, A. and Pasa, A., Migration in EU Rural Areas, 
EUR  29779  EN,  Publications  Office  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg,  2019,  ISBN  978-92-76-
08600-0 (online), doi:10.2760/544298 

69   Source: EUROSTAT [ilc_hch02] 
70   Source: Digital scoreboard, key indicators 
71   http://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/el  
72   EUROSTAT [aei_hri] 
73   Letter Commissioner Kyriakides to GR (Ares(2020)2643693 - 20/05/2020) 
74   European  Medicines  Agency,  European  Surveillance  of  Veterinary  Antimicrobial  consumption 
(ESVAC). Sales of veterinary antimicrobial agents in 31 countries in 2018 – trends from 2010 to 2018 
Tenth ESVAC Report. EMA/24309/2020. 

75   It  concerns  the  targets  related  to  use  and  risk  of  pesticides,  sale  of  antimicrobials,  nutrient  loss,  area 

under organic farming, high diversity landscape features and access to fast broadband internet 

76   European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Health  and  Food  Safety,  Final  Report  of  an  Audit 
carried  out  in  Greece  from  02  to  11  February  2011  in  order  to  Evaluate  the  Implementation  of 
Controls 
slaughter,  2011 
https://ec.europa.eu/food/audits-analysis/audit_reports/details.cfm?rep_id=2753  

for  Animal  Welfare  during 

transport  and  at 

time  of 

the 

77   Willet  W.  et  al.,  Food  in  the  Anthropocene:  the  EAT–Lancet  Commission  on  healthy  diets  from 

sustainable food systems. Lancet 2019; 393: 447–92 

78   https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/health-knowledge-gateway/societal-impacts/burden  
79   EUROSTAT [SDG_02_10]   
80   Red  meat defined as beef, lamb and pork, 115,50g/per capita/d,  net of  waste in the EU 2010,  GBD 

study 2017 and M. Springmann 
81   EUROSTAT [hlth_ehis_fv1e] 
82   European  Environmental  Agency.    Overview  of  national  waste  prevention  programmes  in  Europe. 
http://www.ypeka.gr/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=2Y2%2B%2BPSM4P0%3D&tabid=238&language=el-
GR  

83   EU SCAR AKIS (2019), Preparing for Future AKIS in Europe. Brussels, European Commission 
84   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development based on 

latest adopted version of the Rural Development Programme  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/key_policies/documents/rdp-factsheet-
greece_en.pdf 

85   Member state notifications to the Directorate general for Agriculture and Rural Development 
86   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.24 Agricultural training of farm managers. Based on 

EUROSTAT [ef_mp_training] 

87   European Commission. Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI),  2020, Country Report – Greece 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi 

88   European Commission. Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI),  2020, Country Report – Greece 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi 

89  European Commission. Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI),  2020, Country Report – Greece 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi 

29