COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Commission recommendations for Denmark’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: Denmark, EU strategy, 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) 371 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Commission recommendations for Denmark’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) 372 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}  
 
 
1.  COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENMARK’S CAP STRATEGIC 
PLAN ................................................................................................................................ 2 

Contents 

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

security ................................................................................................................... 2 

1.2  Bolster environmental care and climate action and contribute to the 

environmental- and climate-related objectives of the Union ............................. 3 

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

concerns .................................................................................................................. 4 

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

and digitalisation, and encouraging their uptake ............................................... 5 

1.5  Recommendations .................................................................................................. 5 

2.  ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN 

DENMARK ..................................................................................................................... 8 

2.1  Support viable farm income and resilience across the EU territory to enhance 
food security ........................................................................................................... 8 

2.2  Enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness including greater 

focus on research, technology and digitalisation ................................................ 9 

2.3  Improve farmers' position in the value chain .................................................... 10 

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

sustainable energy ............................................................................................... 12 

2.5  Foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural 

resources such as water, soil and air .................................................................. 14 

2.6  Contribute to the protection of biodiversity, enhance ecosystem services and 

preserve habitats and landscapes ....................................................................... 16 

2.7  Attract young farmers and facilitate business development in rural areas ... 18 

2.8  Promote employment, growth, social inclusion and local development in rural 
areas, including bio-economy and sustainable forestry ................................... 19 

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. ................................................................................................................. 21 

2.10  Cross-cutting objective on knowledge, innovation and digitalisation ............. 22 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATIONS  FOR  DENMARK’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 Denmark. The recommendations are based on analysis of the state of play, 
the needs and the priorities for agriculture and rural areas in Denmark. The recommendations 
address the specific economic, environmental and social objectives of the future C A P 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 Denmark, 
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 

Maintaining  the  competitiveness  of  agriculture  and  food  production  in  Denmark  while 
encouraging farmers to take up more sustainable management practices is a future challenge. 

Income per worker in the agricultural sector is very volatile and stands at about 42% of the 
average wage in Denmark between 2015 and 2019.  

Besides  the  usual  weather  and  market  conditions,  an  important  reason  for  the  volatility  of 
income in Denmark’s agricultural sector is its high dependency on global markets.  

CAP payments based on areas and animals accounted for 32% of agricultural factor income in 
2018. Although Danish agriculture is highly productive, entrepreneurial income is lower than 
agricultural factor income. 

The profitability of the sector is low, and there is a shortage of sector-specific skilled labour. 
It is a challenge to attract workers with the skills to make full use of new technology and, with 
that, to increase productivity and maintain competitiveness. The current system for knowledge 
sharing and targeted advice for farmers has been assessed as fit for that purpose, but it must  
continue to adapt to new challenges, particularly those linked to the Green Deal targets.  

Cooperation  between  farmers  is  highly  structured,  with  cooperatives  (for  processing  and 
marketing  of  dairy,  meat  and  arable  products  and  the  supply  of  inputs)  and  recognised 
producer organisations (in the fruit and vegetables sector) playing an important role. Overall, 
the  high  degree  of  organisation  and  vertical  integration  in  the  food  supply  chain  has  given 
farmers a solid position. However, business to consumer sales are less developed, which may 
present an opportunity for farmers, as there is increasing demand for quality, niche products. 

A sustained approach to marketing is important to maintain the position of Danish agriculture 
on global markets. The close control exercised by farmers over the processing and marketing 
of food helps  to  finance a high level  of investment  in  research, development and marketing 
and maintain the competitiveness of farming.  

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 

 
 
                                                           
1.2  Bolster  environmental  care  and  climate  action  and  contribute  to  the 

environmental- and climate-related objectives of the Union 

The  EU’s  environmental  objectives  are  an  issue  for  Danish  agriculture,  given  its  overall 
structure and intensity, as shown by several key indicators.  

Regarding total greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), agriculture and land use, land-use change, 
and forestry (LULUCF) emissions are large relative to the size of Denmark.  The share from 
agriculture  is  significant  and  has  increased  in  recent  years;  cropland  is  a  large  source  of 
emissions,  ahead  of  agricultural  soils,  enteric  fermentation  and  manure  management.  This 
reflects an intensive livestock-related farming sector.  

The increase in ammonia emissions entails a risk of non-compliance with emission reduction 
commitments.  Forestland  in  Denmark  is  a  net  source  of  emissions,  and  increased  summer 
temperatures (and decreased precipitation) will lead to a higher risk of forest fires and more 
frequent droughts. This will weaken most trees, making them more vulnerable to diseases and 
pests.  

In  terms  of  water  quality,  the  concentrations  of  nitrogen  and  phosphorus  have  been  stable 
since  2009,  though  at  much  higher  levels  than  the  EU  average.  In  relation  to  the  water 
framework  directive  (WFD),  not  all  water  bodies  have  yet  achieved  a  good  status  and 
agriculture  is  identified  as  a  significant  contributing  factor.  Better  integration  of  the  EU’s 
water quality objectives in policy areas such as agriculture is necessary to meet the standards 
of the WFD, along with better synergies between environmental and agricultural policies. In 
addition  to  achieving  nutrient  reduction  targets,  the  CAP  Strategic  Plan  should  be  used  to 
ensure relevant environmental legislation is implemented.  

The share of production of renewable energy in agriculture is lower than the EU average and 
should be increased, although data show a positive trend. Both agriculture and forestry have a 
higher level of energy use than the EU average, even if energy efficiency has improved since 
2015.  

Biodiversity in Denmark is not in a favourable situation, even though the sales of pesticides, 
for  example  has  declined  sharply  over  the  past  decade.  The  farmland  bird  index  shows  a 
considerable  drop  in  farmland  birds  over  the  period  1995-2014  and  a  high  number  of 
pollinators are on the red list. The most important habitat types for species on the 2019 Danish 
red list were forests, grasslands and arable land.  

Semi-natural  habitats  have  declined  considerably  and  remain  highly  fragmented,  while  the 
share of Natura 2000 areas in Denmark is below the EU average. In 2018, only about 15% of 
the  territory  was  covered  by  forest,  and  69%  of  forest  habitats  had  a  deteriorating 
conservation  status.  For  species,  however,  the  overall  situation  is  more  favourable  than  for 
habitats. 

A key issue is the lack of space for nature in Denmark. With regard to Natura 2000, Denmark 
should  consider  a  more  targeted  use  of  the  CAP  to  support  conservation  measures  on 
farmland  and  other  areas  impacted  by  farming  activities,  which  could  contribute  to  the 
Biodiversity Strategy. Overall, farming intensity has decreased in recent years. The area being 
farmed organically has increased and there is strong consumer demand for organic products.  

Denmark might experience certain positive effects on agriculture due to climate change. On 
the other hand, certain annual crops may experience shorter growing seasons and more varied 
yields.  Higher  temperatures  could  lead  to  a  wider  spread  of  plant  and  animal  diseases, 

3 

 
 
changing rainfall patterns may have an impact on agricultural productivity and require better 
drainage systems, while more extreme temperatures will increase the need for irrigation and 
lead to higher water demands for livestock farming.  

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

concerns 

The  transition  towards  more  sustainable  agriculture  while  maintaining  high  productivity 
requires skilled young people as well as skilled managers and workers.  

The population in Denmark is growing, although less in rural than in urban areas. Rural areas 
face an increasing share of people over 65 years old, and a declining share of people under 15 
years  old,  whereas  urban  areas  are  seeing  an  increase  in  young  people.  The  average  age  of 
farmers  has  increased  to  57  years  old,  the  share  of  young  farmers  is  well  below  the  EU 
average  and  there  is  a  significant  gender  imbalance,  with  few  young  female  farmers. 
However, although the total area managed by young farmers has declined, young farmers on 
average manage larger holdings.  

Denmark must take account of the specific needs of women in agriculture and rural areas to 
deliver on gender equality and close the gender gaps in employment, pay, pensions, care and 
decision-making. 

Protecting  agricultural  workers,  especially  those  in  precarious,  seasonal  or  undeclared  jobs, 
will play a major role in ensuring respect for legal rights. This is an essential element of the 
fair EU food system envisaged by the Farm to Fork Strategy. 

Access to land remains a challenge, as land prices are high and an average farm represents an 
investment  of  about  EUR  3.5  million.  The  employment  rate  is  relatively  high  in  rural  areas 
and around the national average; the unemployment rate is relatively low in rural areas for age 
groups, but unemployment among young people is higher than for rural areas in general. 

GDP per inhabitant (in purchasing power standard) is significantly above the EU average, but 
rural areas are closer to  the EU average. Rural areas currently account for 24% of the gross 
value added.  

Turnover  in  the  bio-economy  sector  in  agriculture  has  grown  slowly  in  recent  years,  and 
employment in this sector has declined. Further development of biomass production and bio-
refining may present opportunities for rural areas.  

The system for handling and controlling of the use of pesticides is robust. However, Denmark 
should  continue  to  promote  the  sustainable  use  of  pesticides,  particularly  by  ensuring  the 
uptake of integrated pest management practices.  

Denmark  has  low  usage  of  antimicrobials  and  well-developed  policies  covering  their 
availability and use.  

Denmark should continue to address animal welfare, particularly the persistent practice of tail 
docking.  The  focus  needs  to  be  on  promoting  animal  husbandry  systems  and  practices  that 
improve animal welfare, and particularly to reduce stress for pigs.  

Denmark should make an effort to shift towards healthier, more environmentally sustainable 
food choices, in line with national dietary recommendations, as it has – among others – a low 
consumption of fruits and vegetables.  

4 

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

digitalisation, and encouraging their uptake 

The  agricultural  knowledge  and  innovation  system  (AKIS)  in  Denmark  is  robust  and  well 
integrated, and has a key role in helping Danish agriculture maintain  its position as a global 
player and front-runner in employing new green solutions. 

The advisory services in Denmark are responsive to the needs of farmers and concerns from 
civil society. They also advise farmers on complying with various requirements and  on new 
technologies.  

The successful cooperation between applied science and end users has the potential to develop 
further. However, Denmark has decided not to support operational groups under the European 
innovation partnership. Therefore, the agriculture and forestry sectors are not benefitting fully 
from  of  innovation  and  knowledge  sharing  activities  at  EU  level,  and  will  miss  the 
opportunity to participate in cross-border operational groups. 

Despite the relatively good coverage of fast broadband in rural areas, this remains a challenge 
in  some  areas.  Denmark  needs  to  address  this  challenge  through  a  complementary  use  of 
CAP, other EU, or national funding.  

Around 60% of people in rural areas have digital skills at basic level or above, which is well 
above the EU average.  

1.5  Recommendations 

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

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

  Enhance competitiveness and market orientation by maintaining a strong focus on 
research,  development  and  innovation  to  be  able  to  adapt  agricultural  production  to 
future  challenges  and  thereby  stay  competitive  and  be  able  to  maintain  a  strong 
position  on  the  global  markets,  particularly  in  the  field  of  high-quality  and 
sustainable/green production and processing methods.  

  Focus  on  preserving  and  reinforcing  the  cooperative  structure,  considering  that 
the  high  level  of  control  by  farmers  of  the  food  supply  chain  facilitates  long-term 
investments to adapt to future challenges, including managing operational risk for the 
primary producers. 

  Ensure  the  viability  of  farms.  Consider  a  better  targeting  of  support  by  reducing 
income gaps between different farm sizes a more even distribution of support (using, 
for  example,  the  complementary  redistributive  income  support  for  sustainability  and 
the reduction of payments) and advancing in the internal convergence process. 

5 

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

  Promoting  climate  change  mitigation,  reducing  greenhouse  gas  emissions,  in 
particular  from  enteric  fermentation  and  manure  in  line  with  the  Methane  Strategy. 
Measures  could  target  improved  feed  management.  Encourage  carbon  farming  and 
improve management practises for carbon-rich soils and peatlands in order to enhance 
the current carbon sinks and reduce carbon losses. Consider rewetting of peatlands. 

  Promote  climate  adaptation  and  increase  resilience  via  targeted  investment  in 
research  and  development  of  management  practises  and  resilient  plant  species. 
Promote better water management on farmland.  

  Contribute to the EU  Green Deal  target on reducing nutrient losses and address 
the impact of intensive farming on water quality and air emissions. Particular attention 
should be drawn to leaching of nutrients, run off and discharge into watercourses and 
the  sea.  Measures  to  encourage  sustainable  nutrient  management  practises,  such  as 
precision farming, set aside of lowland, catch crops, buffer strips along watercourses 
and conservation/zero tillage, should be considered.  

  Contribute to the EU Green Deal targets on biodiversity, in line with the actions of 
the  Biodiversity  Strategy,  in  particular  through  interventions  to  maintain  and  restore 
the status of habitats, such as grasslands, peatlands and other wetlands and protected 
species,  farmland  birds  and  wild  pollinators  in  line  with  the  prioritized  action 
framework  for  CAP  funding.  Denmark  should  in  particular  consider  high  diversity 
landscape features in intensively managed agricultural landscapes. 

  Improve air quality, in particular by reducing ammonia emissions from the livestock 
production,  by  means  of  requirements  and  schemes  supporting  sustainable 
management practices. 

  Contribute to the EU Green Deal target on organic farming by supporting farmers 
for  the  conversion  to  and  maintenance  of  organic  production  in  line  with  the 
development of consumer demand.  

  Increase  sustainability  in  production  and  use  of  energy  along  the  food  supply 
chain,  by  supporting  the  use  of  improved  technologies  for  efficient  energy  use  and 
increasing the share of renewable energy in the energy mix.  

  Fostering  sustainable  forest  management  and  afforestation,  enhancing  multi-
functionality,  forest  protection  and  restoration  of  forest  ecosystems  to  reach  good 
condition of habitats and species linked to the forests. Enhance ecological services and 
biodiversity to build resilience to threats such as climate change impacts on forests. 

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

  Promote  generational  renewal  while  paying  attention  to  the  gender  imbalance,  by 
encouraging use of CAP instruments for young farmers in combination with national 
policies.  

  Promote  higher  levels  of  animal  welfare  by  putting  in  place  more  ambitious 
measures  to  support  farmers  in  improving  their  livestock  management  practices, 
especially as regards the welfare of pigs. 
6 

 
 
  Contribute to the EU Green Deal target on access to fast broadband internet by 
further  increasing  digital  connectivity  in  rural  areas  to  improve  living  and  business 
conditions, in complementarity with other EU or national funding.  

  Support the development of the bio-economy  sector to  better  exploit  the potential 
of  non-food  products  based  on  agricultural  raw  materials  and  promote  this  business 
opportunity  for  farming  and  rural  areas.  Consider  measures  to  reduce  food  loss  and 
waste in agricultural production. 

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

  Reinforce knowledge on sustainable production methods in the food supply chain 
by playing a more active role in the European  Innovation Partnership, by supporting 
establishment  of  operational  groups,  and  support  for  stronger  cross-border 
cooperation.  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
2.  ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN DENMARK 

The agricultural sector in Denmark has high productivity. The sector is well consolidated and 
able to take up new technology and research. The food supply chain up to the level of retail is 
largely  controlled  by  farmers  via  their  cooperatives,  notably  for  dairy,  meat  and  arable 
products. The output value has been increasing over time and the net trade balance is strongly 
positive.  Labour  costs  are  high  but  partly  offset  by  high  labour  productivity.  There  is  a 
shortage  of  skilled  labour.  The  number  of  young  farmers  entering  the  sector  has  been 
declining. The intensive farming has negative impacts on the environment and climate, such 
as nutrients leaching, GHG emissions, loss of habitats and biodiversity. Rural areas are doing 
well in respect of employment rate and social inclusion. Overall, the population in rural areas 
in  Denmark  is  increasing;  however,  the  share  of  young  people  has  decreased.  Broadband 
coverage is good, though clearly not as good in rural areas than for Denmark as a whole. 

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

food security 

In Denmark, the entrepreneurial agricultural income per worker fluctuates strongly. Out of 14 
years,  2  years  were  loss  making,  in  6  years  the  income  was  between  0%  and  30%  of  the 
average national income, and in 3 years only, agricultural income was higher than 60% of the 
national average income.1 

The  average  agricultural  factor  income  per  worker  has  also  shown  high  volatility  between 
2005  and  2018,  fluctuating  between  EUR  22  000  in  2008  and  EUR  60  700  in  2012.2  The 
agricultural income per worker is on average EUR 36 000, which is about 42% of the average 
wage  in  the  whole  economy  between  2015  and  2019.  However,  after  2015  the  income  has 
fallen,  being  even  negative,  for  the  farms  with  economic  size  below  EUR  100  000.  These 
would  in  many  cases  be  part  time  farms  without  an  objective  to  generate  an  operational 
surplus.  In  particular,  the  agricultural  entrepreneurial  income  (including  wages)  per  Annual 
Work Unit remains very low or negative for the cattle sector, in spite of the increased level of 
support3. Danish agriculture is highly performing in adding value but this does not reward the 
farmers for the remuneration of own production factors as the entrepreneurial income is quite 
lower than the agricultural factor income.  

From  2013  to  2018,  the  share  of  direct  payments  in  income  varied  between  21%  and  30%. 
Payments under rural development (except investment support) accounted for approximately 
2%  of  the  factor  income.  No  payments  for  areas  facing  natural  or  specific  constraints  are 
granted  under  rural  development,  whereas  farmers  based  on  islands  without  bridged 
connection receive a top-up to direct payments. 

The income per worker was above the average agricultural factor income for milk, granivores, 
and other field crops, but below average for the cattle and sheep & goats sectors.4 Most arable 
land  receive  direct  payments  of  EUR  250-300  per  hectare,  except  for  cattle  farms  where 
additional coupled support is paid and the average payment was approximately EUR 490/ha 
in  20185.  In  2018,  20%  of  the  beneficiaries  farmed  73%  of  the  land  and  received  75%  of 
direct  payments.6  In  2016,  about  47%  of  the  beneficiaries  received  less  than  EUR  5  000  of 
direct payments, out of which 26% received less than EUR 2 000.7  

The average holding size in Denmark is 1118 hectares, one of the largest of the EU-279. The 
same applies to the average economic size of holdings, which reaches EUR 404 000 per farm 
in  2018.  The  very  small  holdings  are  often  capital  and  labour  intensive  livestock  farms. 
However there is a gap in income when it comes to small- and medium-sized farms (between 
20 and 75 hectares), which represent 38% of the entire population of agricultural holdings and 

8 

 
 
cover about 14% of the total agricultural land. In particular, for this class of farms between 20 
and 75 hectares, the agricultural income in 2018 is only 25% of the national average10. 

Denmark is facing continuous labour shortages in certain sectors, including agriculture. The 
shortages concern mainly sector-specific skilled workers. While higher numbers of vocational 
education and training graduates would help meet labour market needs, participation in such 
schemes remains low.11 

Multi-peril crop insurance is not available in Denmark but the insurers offer various types of 
other  insurance  solutions12.  There  is  a  need  to  deploy  risk  management  instruments  and 
strategies. As far as crop insurance covering climatic risks is concerned, uptake in Denmark is 
below  25%  of  farms13.  The  low  uptake  in  various  income  stabilisation  schemes  is  probably 
due  to  the  fact  that  such  solutions  are  considered  less  cost  efficient  by  farmers.  Danish 
agriculture  is  well  consolidated  and  the  control  over  the  food  supply  chain  via  the 
cooperatives  is  relatively  high.  This  means  that  the  platform  for  farmers  to  jointly  focus  on 
marketing,  research  and  innovation,  and  thereby  develop  contemporary  products  and  stay 
competitive,  is  good.  In  case  of  demand  shocks,  enterprises  with  a  high  market  power, 
controlled  by  the  farmers,  can  be  used  to  reach  new  outlets  or  to  shift  focus  into  other 
products.  The  well-functioning  cooperation  between  farmers  and  a  competitive  food 
processing industry are probably an efficient income stabilisation tool. 

A stabilisation of farmers’ income can be done with instruments outside the CAP as well. For 
example, the use of measures within the fiscal system to balance income between years could 
be a cost-efficient way for individual enterprises.  

Trend in agricultural income (versus average wage in the economy) in Denmark 

Agricultural factor income per AWU in real terms  

Agricultural income as % of average wage in the economy  

Agricultural income as % of average wage in the economy – EU-27 

Graph: Trend in agricultural income (versus average wage in the economy)14 
N.B.: the agricultural income as percent of the average wage is calculated as agricultural entrepreneurial income 
plus wages and salaries in the agricultural sector per worker (thus different from the agricultural factor income). 
After deduction of rented capital and land, the agricultural entrepreneurial income is negative in Denmark for 
2008 and 2009. 

2.2  Enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness including greater focus 

on research, technology and digitalisation 

The  food  production  makes  a  considerable  contribution  to  Danish  economy.  Investments  in 
research  and  technological  development  are  needed  in  order  for  the  sector  to  continue 
improving  its  productivity  and  develop  its  strong  global  position.  With  a  total  level  of 
investment  in  research  of  almost  3.0%  of  GDP  in  2015,  Denmark  invests  more  in  research 
than the OECD average of 2.4%15. The largest share of investments in research is made by the 
private  sector.  Active  international  research  collaboration  is  also  an  essential  condition  for 
9 

 
 
 
maintaining  and  developing  competitiveness  in  the  food  sector.  It  is  crucial  that  private 
companies  benefit  from  the  international  research  and  innovation  initiatives,  for  example 
through  participation  in  EU  Research  and  Development  programmes.  There  is  a  growing 
demand  among  consumers  for  innovative  food.  Safety,  quality,  animal  welfare,  the 
environment  as  well  as  ethics  play  a  role  in  consumers’  choices.  Food  businesses  must 
produce  and  market  high-quality  products  under  sustainable  conditions  to  be  able  to  stay 
competitive. There is also an important need for a focus on food security and traceability in a 
farm-to-fork perspective, for example through increased digitalisation. 

The agri-food net trade balance was EUR 4 770 million in 2018, whereof EUR 4 089 million 
was generated from non-EU Member States16. The high dependency on global markets makes 
the  sector  vulnerable  to  external  shocks  (commodity  prices,  trade  barriers,  geopolitical 
risks/events).  

The  total  factor  productivity  in  Danish  agriculture  is  higher  than  the  EU  average17.  Labour 
productivity  is  sticking  out  as  the  second  highest  in  the  EU.  Labour  costs  are  high  thus 
requiring that labour productivity remains high. From 2009 to 2017, the average net on-farm 
investments have been EUR 1 363 million per year18.  

Technologies  for  a  more  accurate  use  and  targeted  allocation  of  fertilisers,  etc.  (precision 
agriculture)  is  widely  adopted  by  Danish  farmers,  in  particular  on  large  holdings.  Precision 
technology is applied on 66% of the total agricultural area. The share of the number of farms 
using  precision  technology  was  24%  in  201919.  Denmark  has  an  effective  system  for 
knowledge-sharing,  agricultural  advice  and  cooperation  between  public  institutions  and 
farmers,  translating  new  knowledge  from  research  into  practice.  A  challenge  for  the 
exploitation of new technologies may be the low rate of generational renewal20. 

The educational system in the area of agriculture and forestry provides a sufficient number of 
highly qualified persons  for the needs of the agricultural  sector; nevertheless,  recruitment  is 
difficult since farming is not always seen as the most attractive field of employment. The lack 
of sufficient qualified staff is a threat to the continued development of the agricultural sector.  

Total factor productivity in agriculture in Denmark (Index 2005 = 100) 

Total factor productivity 

Land productivity 

Labour productivity 

Intermediate costs productivity 

Capital productivity 

TFP EU-27 

Graph: Total factor productivity in agriculture in Denmark21 

2.3  Improve farmers' position in the value chain 

The Danish primary production is focused on commodities, in particular dairy and pig meat, 
to  be processed  and later exported. The share of products  suitable for business to  consumer 
sale or for on-farm processing (such as fruit and vegetables) is relatively low. From the total 
agricultural output, crops represented 35%, whereof cereals 13% and animals 65%, whereof 

10 

 
 
pig meat 31% and dairy 21%. In 2017, Denmark produced 8.3% of all pig meat and 3.7% of 
the milk in the EU-2822.  

Non-recognised  producer  organisations  in  the  form  of  cooperatives  have  a  long  history  and 
large market share in marketing farmers’ primary production, in particular on dairy, meats and 
arable  products,  and  in  the  supply  of  agricultural  inputs,  such  as  machinery,  fertiliser,  seed 
and  feed.  The  cooperatives  are  competitive  and  give  the  farmers  control  over  an  important 
part of the food chain. The agricultural sector has gained a significant position on the global 
markets, in particular in Asia for pig meat and dairy products, turning Denmark into a large 
net exporter.  

The share of the value added captured by the agricultural  sector in  Denmark is  close to  the 
EU-average  (21%  in  2017  vs.  EU-27  average  at  27%)23.  The  share  has  remained 
approximately  at  the  same  level  since  2008.  Part  of  the  value  added  generated  by  the 
cooperatives in the food processing stages and returned to its members/farmers as dividend or 
retroactive payments is not included in the value added as defined here.  

The market for business to consumer sales (on farm sale, open markets etc.), where the farmer 
is capturing a large share of the value added, is less developed. This partly explains why the 
share  of  value  added  captured  by  the  farmer  is  relatively  low.  This  is  not  necessarily  a 
weakness.  The  farming  and  processing  is  well  consolidated  and  profits  from  economies  of 
scale.  Farmers  capture  a  high  net  value  added/farmer  in  absolute  terms.  The  prices  on  food 
and  non-alcoholic  beverages  in  Denmark  are  considerably  above  EU-27  average  with  an 
index at 129 (2019)24. 

There  are  only  two  recognised  Producer  Organisations  in  Denmark,  both  in  the  fruit  and 
vegetables sector. The producer organisations are marketing 55% of the fruit and vegetables 
production,  which  is  slightly  higher  than  the  EU  average  of  50%25.  Prices  and  volumes  are 
volatile on an annual basis. There are no recognised interbranch organisations (IBO). 

The strong position of the cooperatives has led to a significant degree of concentration in the 
dairy  and  meat  sectors,  which  has  opened  business  opportunities  for  specialised  dairies  in 
recent  years.  The  demand  for  locally  produced  food  (niche  products)  increases  and  food  is 
marketed  more  widely  on  alternative  platforms,  such  as  targeted  supermarkets,  online,  food 
communities, directly to restaurants etc. Therefore, there are more possibilities for farmers to 
strengthen  their  position  in  the  food  supply  chain  by  diversifying  outlets  and/or  in  food 
communities than engaging in direct sales on the farm.  

By September 2020, 13 products are registered under the EU quality schemes whereof five in 
the category of wine and four in the category of cheese.26 

11 

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

Primary production 
Food and beverage consumer services 

Food and beverage manufacturing 
% for primary producers (right axis) 
Graph: Value added for primary producers in the food chain in million EUR27 

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

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

energy 

In  2018,  greenhouse  gas  (GHG)  emissions  from  agriculture  in  Denmark  amounted  to  11 
million  tonnes  of  CO2  equivalents,  which  represents  about  2.8%  of  EU  emissions  from 
agriculture, a share that has been relatively stable in recent years (2008: 2.83%). Agriculture 
accounts for 20.14% of total GHG emissions in Denmark in 2018, an increase from 17.14% in 
2008  and  nearly  double  the  EU  average  for  GHG  emissions  from  agriculture  of  11.27%  in 
2018  (2008:  9.70%)28.  The  main  sources  of  GHG  emissions  in  agriculture  are  enteric 
fermentation  at  34%  (mainly  cattle,  lower  than  the  EU  average  of  about  44%),  manure 
management at 27% (of which swine manure 46% and cattle manure 45%) well above the EU 
average  of  about  14%  and  soil  management  at  37%  (EU  average  38%)29.  For  methane 
specifically,  in  2018  emissions  from  agriculture  in  Denmark  were  239.6  thousand  tonnes,  a 
slight  increase  from  236.75  thousand  tonnes  in  2016.30  Of  the  methane  emissions  in 
agriculture 99.95% come from livestock (stable ratio over the years). In 2016 to 2018, about 
73%  of  livestock  emissions  of  methane  were  from  ruminants  (cattle  and  sheep).  In  2016 
methane  emissions  were  203  kg/ruminant  LSU  in  Denmark,  whereas  for  EU-27  it  was  163 
kg/ruminant LSU.31 

The (draft) SWOT takes account of the high emissions from agriculture, however notes that in 
Denmark GHG emissions are 3.71 kg CO2 per kg meat produced, far less than the EU average 
8.14 kg (2016)32. However, it is also noted that as climate-efficiency is already there, there is 
no  immediate  potential  for  a  further  fast  reduction.  On  manure  the  SWOT  points  to  further 
use  of  technology  (acidification,  cooling)  to  reduce  emissions,  particularly  methane  and 
ammonia.  

Methane  represents  54%  of  the  total  GHG  emissions  (in  CO2  equivalents)  from  agriculture 
excl.  land  use,  land  use  change  and  forest  (LULUCF).  Methane  emissions  predominately 
originate  from  livestock  production,  in  particular  cattle  and  pigs.  All  categories  of  the 
LULUCF sector are emissions, except for harvested wood products. Cropland is an important 
source  of  emissions,  representing  37%  of  the  total  GHG  emissions  from  agriculture33.  The 
increase  of  GHG-emissions  from  soil  management  2013-2018  was  +2.65%,  (EU  average 
+2.02%)34. 2.6% of the soil in Denmark is peatlands35. 

The production of renewable energy in agriculture in 2018 is 7.1% of the total in Denmark, up 
from 3.6% in 2015 but below the EU average of 12.1%36. Forestry accounted for 42.9% of the 
12 

 
 
 
 
production  in  renewable  energy  in  2018,  just  above  the  EU  average  of  41.4%,  and  a  small 
decrease  from  45.1%  in  2015.  The  energy  use  in  agriculture  and  forestry37  in  2018 is  4.3% 
(2015:  4.5%)  of  total  energy  consumption,  among  the  highest  in  the  EU  and  above  the  EU 
average of 2.9%. The direct use of energy in agriculture and forestry decreased from 195.4 kg 
of oil equivalent hectare of agricultural and forestry area in 2015 to 184.4 kg of oil equivalent 
in 2018 (i.e. energy efficiency improved). 

The  trends  for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  are  overall  favourable  in  Denmark, 
notably the trends for Indigenous production of energy from forest and agriculture 2013-2018 
at  35.1%  (EU  average  0.13%),  and  for  energy  from  other  biogases  from  anaerobic 
fermentation 2013–2018 at 256.55% (EU average 21.39%).  

The mean organic carbon content has decreased from 27.5g/kg in 2012 to 25.8 g/kg in 2015, 
and the total estimate of organic carbon content in arable land has fallen to 258 megatons in 
2015.  

In  2018  only  0.28%  of  total  UAA  was  under  management  contracts  (under  the  Rural 
Development  Programme)  targeting  reduction  of  GHG  and/or  ammonia  emissions.  The 
National  Energy  and  Climate  Plan  in  respect  of  the  dimension  of  decarbonisation  includes 
need  for  investments  to  reduce  emissions  in  agriculture  and  subsidies  for  the  conversion  of 
arable  land  on  organic  soils  to  nature38.  In  the  SWOT  setting  aside  of  agricultural  lowland 
areas  is  assessed  to  be  a  cost-efficient  way  of  achieving  reductions  in  CO2  emissions39. 
Denmark  already  has  planned  national  measures  for  afforestation  and  for  rewetting  of 
agricultural land (carbon rich lowland) to  reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture 
for the period 2021 to 203040 and to deliver more biodiversity.  

The  effects  of  climate  change  may  affect  agriculture  in  different  ways.  The  temperature 
increase will lead to higher productivity for many crops due to longer growing seasons, and 
may lead to growing new crops in Denmark, whereas e.g. rapeseed and cereal may experience 
shorter growing seasons. Furthermore, higher temperatures are likely to lead to a wider spread 
of  plant  diseases,  and  further  spread  of  animal  diseases.  Changing  rainfall  patterns  and 
increased risk of droughts might impact agricultural productivity in Denmark. 

Total Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture (including and excluding LULUCF) 
in Denmark (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) 

Graph: Total Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture (including and excluding LULUCF)41 

13 

 
 
 
 
2.5  Foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural resources 

such as water, soil and air 

Ammonia emissions from Danish agriculture have decreased by 41% from 127 030 tonnes in 
1995  to  75  510  tonnes  in  2013.  From  2013  to  2018,  emissions  have  had  a  small  overall 
increase  by  2%  to  77  010  tonnes,  with  fluctuations  between  the  years.  Agriculture  has 
accounted  for  some  93-95%  of  Denmark’s  ammonia  emissions  since  2000  (before  this  was 
slightly higher), this is close to the average for EU-28 of 92.88%. Some 75-80% of emissions 
from  agriculture  stem  from  the  livestock  sector,  a  share  that  until  the  late  1990’s  was  a  bit 
lower. In 2017, 21% of the NH3 emissions originated from the pig farming sector, 11% from 
the  cattle  dairy  sector,  11%  from  the  use  of  synthetic  Nitrogen  fertilisers,  and  5%  from  the 
non-dairy  cattle  sector;  50%  of  the  ammonia  emissions  stem  from  the  category  “other 
agricultural sectors”42. Denmark is among the Member States considered at high-risk of non-
compliance with emission reduction commitments for ammonia. In 2020-2029, there is a need 
for a reduction of 12% from current levels, and from 2030 and beyond there is a need for a 
reduction  of  between  10%  and  30%  from  current  levels43.  However,  recent  developments 
related  to  the  fur  industry  following  the  Covid-19  pandemic  is  likely  to  contribute  to  the 
reduction of ammonia emissions.  

The quality of soil, expressed as the soil organic carbon content (SOC), is low compared to 
the EU-average. The mean organic carbon content has decreased from 27.49 g per kg in 2012 
to  25.8 g in  2015, compared to  43.1 g per kg for EU-2844.  In terms  of soil erosion, the soil 
loss rate by water (RUSLE2015 Model) is  0.5 tonnes per hectare per  year, compared to  the 
EU average of 2.545 (JRC). The estimated agricultural area affected by severe water erosion 
(>11  t  ha-1  yr-1)  shows  that  such  area  is  negligible  (0.002%  of  agricultural  area)  in 
Denmark46. Yet, locally soil erosion by water can still be a concern with  unsustainable land 
management practices. In Denmark, the wind erosion is a concern as the losses due to wind 
erosion in arable lands is among the highest in  EU.47 In Denmark 88%48 of tillable UAA is 
conventionally  tilled  and  a  shift  to  low-impact  practices  such  as  conservation/zero  tillage 
should  be  considered.  The  impact  of  soil  improving  measures  may  be  increased  by  linking 
them  to  research,  innovation  and  demonstration  activities  available  under  the  forthcoming 
Horizon Europe Mission on soil health. 

Both  the  estimated  nitrogen  and  the  phosphorus  surplus  on  agricultural  land49  in  Denmark 
have decreased over time since 2004, as shown in  the graph below, but  stayed rather stable 
since 2009, with 80 kg N/ha and 7.0 kg P/ha in 2015. The surplus remains high compared to 
the EU average of 46.5 kg N/ha and 0.5 kg P/ha50.  

In relation to the Water Framework Directive, around 48% of surface waters were in less than 
good ecological status and for chemical status the majority have unknown status and less than 
1% are failing good status. For groundwater, 1% is failing good quantitative status, 25% are 
failing  good  chemical  status  and  31%  are  in  unknown  chemical  status.  Diffuse  agricultural 
pollution  is  a  significant  pressure  for  coastal  and  lake  water  bodies  but  is  not  assessed  for 
river water bodies and this has been reported as a gap as it is likely to be an impact on river 
water bodies also.  

In this context, special attention is to be paid to the Baltic Sea. Eutrophication is among the 
most influential and long lasting environmental pressures in the Baltic Sea. At least 97% of 
the region was assessed to be below good eutrophication status, including all of the open sea 
area  and  86%  of  the  coastal  waters.  Indicators  reflecting  nutrient  levels  were  generally 
furthest  away  from  good  status.  Long  term  trends  shows  signs  towards  improved 
eutrophication status in the westernmost Baltic Sea. Although signs of improvement are seen 
in  some  areas,  effects  of  past  and  current  nutrient  inputs  still  influence  the  overall  status51. 
14 

 
 
Nutrient  inputs to  the Baltic Sea  around Denmark however have significantly decreased for 
nitrogen in the Danish Straits and Kattegat, and for phosphorus in Kattegat.52 

In 2017, 44% of the ground water bodies in Denmark were in good chemical status, 25% are 
failing good status and 31% were unknown.53 In 2017, 15% of surface water monitoring sites 
were  of  high  quality,  which  is  status  quo  compared  to  2012,  and  2%  were  of  poor  quality, 
which is an improvement compared to 2012 (5%)54. 16.6% of the water stations monitored in 
the context of the Nitrates Directive show nitrates concentration above 50mg/L for the period 
2012-2015. 

According to the Commission report on the nitrates Directive implementation55, Denmark had 
a  high  decrease  of  the  livestock  density  of  14%  since  2010,  with  an  EU  average  of  a  3% 
decrease (EU-28). Denmark still has a high livestock density (1.57 livestock units per ha of 
utilised agricultural area in 2016)56. 

Denmark has since many years spent EAFRD funds for non-productive investments (such as 
establishment  of  wetlands)  and  management  commitments  to  improve  water  management, 
and  has  a  target  for  2023  of  supporting  management  commitments  on  26%  of  the  utilised 
agricultural area (UAA) for that purpose. 

The renewable freshwater resources in Denmark are M2.8 m3 per 1,000 inhabitants. This is a 
bit higher than the EU average of M1.6 m357. The share of irrigable area is 8.3% of the total 
UAA  (2016)58.  The  EU-27  average  was  8.9%  of  UAA.  The  total  water  abstraction  in 
agriculture  was  almost  M96.9  m3  in  201259.  The  share  of  irrigation  in  the  gross  water 
abstraction were 14.9%, which however was much higher the year before (25.0) – the figure 
varies  a  lot  according  to  the  weather  conditions  of  the  year.  The  EU  average  for  2012  was 
28.060.  There  are  significant  variation  in  the  Water  Exploitation  Index  for  Denmark,  which 
was 1.28% for Jutland and 24.94% for Zealand in 201561.  

Kg N/ha/year 

Potential surplus of N and P on agricultural land in Denmark 

Kg P/ha/year 

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

EU-27 GNB for Nitrogen 

Potential surplus of phosphorus on agricultural land (in kg P/ha/year) 
Graph: Potential surplus of N and P on agricultural land in Denmark62 

15 

 
 
 
 
2.6  Contribute  to  the  protection  of  biodiversity,  enhance  ecosystem  services  and 

preserve habitats and landscapes 

The  situation  for  the  conservation  status  of  agricultural  habitats  (grassland)63  is  among  the 
worst  in  the  EU  with  11%  unfavourable-inadequate  and  89%  unfavourable-bad.  This  has 
remained unchanged over the two reporting periods 2007-2012 and 2013-2018. In 2018, the 
total area of fallow land was 35 700 hectares64 and covered 1.4% of UAA (compared to EU-
average of 4.1%). 0.4% was covered by landscape elements (EU-average 0.5%).65  

Farming intensity66 (C.33) overall has gone in the direction of lower intensity in recent years, 
in  2015 17.5% of UAA  was managed  with  low input intensity increasing  to  42.7% in  2017 
(EU-average 27%). Over the same period, high intensity farming on 48.7% of UAA decreased 
to 27.5%. Livestock density peaked at 1.86 LSU per ha of UAA in 2010 and has decreased to 
1.58 in 2016.67 

The share of UAA in Natura 2000 areas however has decreased in recent years, from 4.7% of 
agricultural  area  including  natural  grassland  in  2016  to  4.0%  in  2018,  even  if  some  of  the 
decrease  may  be  that  agricultural  areas  in  Natura  2000  cease  to  be  farmed.  Denmark  falls 
behind  the  EU-average  that  has  increased  over  the  period  from  7.2%  to  11.2%.  20.1%  of 
forest area was under Natura 2000 in 2018, with the EU average at 31%. Of the total territory 
8.3% was under Natura 2000 network, slightly increasing to 8.4% in 2018, and much below 
the  EU  average  of  19.8%.  The  Ministry  of  food,  agriculture  and  fisheries  estimates  that  in 
2016 there were 340 000 ha of semi-natural grassland in need of management and that 50% of 
these  occurred  on  High  Nature  Value  farmland  outside  Natura  2000.  Currently  100  000 
hectares of grassland and semi-natural grassland are under agri-environment commitments for 
extensive farming to preserve the grassland biodiversity.  

A key issue for Denmark is the lack of space for nature. The area of open natural habitat has 
declined considerably over the past century but is now relatively stable at around 10% of the 
territory.  Greening  of  agricultural  land  and  management  practices  remains  a  challenge  for 
developing  green  infrastructure  overall  in  Denmark68.  Denmark  has  made  insufficient 
progress  even  with  regard  to  stopping  deterioration  of  protected  habitats.  A  related  need 
identified was to ensure an overview of measures adopted under various legal commitments, 
such  as  addressing  nitrate  pollution  as  part  of  water  planning,  in  terms  of  making  progress 
toward Favourable Conservation Status. 

Landscape fragmentation remains one of the primary challenges for the implementation of the 
EU nature directives69  70. The Danish environment protection agency has also identified that 
the natural  habitat  areas  are today  generally small  and far apart71. The farmland birds index 
had decreased from  93.9 in  2009 to  77.4 in  2013, up to  88.3 in  2014 and then fell again  to 
74.4 in 2018, indicating a long-term decline.  

The assessment of species is generally more favourable than the assessment of habitats. 34% 
of  species  (except  birds)  have  favourable  status  (compared  to  EU-average  23%).  13%  of 
species  (except  birds)  have  status  unfavourable-inadequate  (EU-average  42%).  28%  of 
species however have unfavourable-bad status (EU-average 18%).72  

With regard to  pollinators, 44% of bumblebees  and 35% of butterflies  were on the national 
red  list  of  threatened  species  (2019)73.  Furthermore,  managed  honeybees  are  important 
pollinators for a number of pollinator-dependent crops and may also contribute to pollination 
of wild plants. Pesticides are among the biggest threats to insects - the sales of pesticides have 
decreased by 31% from 2011 to 2018.74  

16 

 
 
Agricultural area under organic farming has increased slowly but steadily in recent years and 
was  about  10%  in  2018  (EU  average  8%)  and  the  area  under  conversion  as  percentage  of 
UAA  is  increasing  which  indicates  a  continued  growth75.  Further,  and  in  addition  to  areas 
under  organic  farming,  areas  under  agri-environment-climate  commitments  covered  more 
than 3% of UAA in 2018 (EU average 15%).  

The  market  for  organic  products  is  well  developed  in  spite  of  relatively  limited  surface 
dedicated to organic production. Danish consumers spend the most money on organic food in 
the EU: EUR 312 per capita /year (second in the world after Switzerland). Moreover 11.5% of 
the Danish grocery is organic, the highest share all over the world (mostly: eggs, milk, fruit 
and  butter).  Production  is  growing  slowly  but  demand  is  growing  significantly,  which 
indicates potential for increasing the national production.  

In  2020,  about  15%  of  the  area  in  Denmark  is  covered  by  forest76,  and  of  the  forest  area 
20.1%  is  under  Natura  200077.  Of  the  forest  and  wooded  land  5.6%  was  protected  for 
biodiversity  conservation  and  13.2%  protected  to  conserve  landscapes  and  specific  natural 
elements78. The conservation status  of 31% of forest  habitats  was assessed  as stable but  the 
other 69% as decreasing79. 

Area under organic farming in Denmark 

Hectares under organic farming 
% of area under organic farming in the EU-27 

% of agricultural area under organic farming 

Graph: Area under organic farming80 

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

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

7
2
U
E

E
B

G
B

Z
C

K
D

E
D

E
E

E
I

L
E

S
E

R
F

R
H

T
I

Y
C

V
L

T
L

U
L

U
H

T
M

L
N

T
A

L
P

T
P

I

O S
R

I

K F
S

E
S

fallow land as % of agricultural area
Fallow land as % of agricultural area 

Landscape features as % of agricultural area 
landscape elements as % of agricultural area*

Graph: High diversity landscape features81 82 

17 

 
 
 
 
2.7 

Attract young farmers and facilitate business development in rural areas 

Danish  agriculture  is  characterised  by  a  high  percentage  of  ageing  farmers.  In  2017,  the 
average age of farmers was 57 years83. 

In  2016,  the  910  young  farmers  (aged  below  35  years)84  corresponded  to  2.6%  of  all  farm 
managers  (much  lower  than  the  share  of  5.1%  for  EU-27).  This  share  has  continued  to 
decrease from 2005 to 2013 (from 7.3% to 2.5%), but stabilised in the following years (2.6% 
in  2016).  This  trend  is  different  from  the  EU-27  where  it  first  increased  between  2005  and 
2010  (from  6.9%  to  7.5%)  and  subsequently  decreased  to  5.1%  in  201685.  This  is  also 
confirmed by the old age dependency ratio86: whereas in 2010 there were 11 young farmers 
for every 100 farmers above 35 years of age (14 in EU-27), in 2016, they were only 4.8 (9 in 
EU-27)87.  

The  ratio  was  least  favourable  in  the  Central  Denmark  Region  (Midtjylland)  and  in  the 
Zealand  Region  (Sjælland)88.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  ageing  within  the  group  of  young 
farmers  is  progressing:  between  2005  and  2016  the  number  of  those  aged  below  35  years 
decreased by 76%, whereas those above 65 decreased only by 6%89.  

The ratio of young female managers to male managers is very low: only about 8% in 2016, a 
sharp decline from about 15% in 2005/2007. The EU trend has increased to 30% in 2010, and 
since then remained stable90. 

The total area managed by farmers under 35 years old fell from 9.4% in 2005 to 4% in 2016. 
The  average  farm  size  however  tends  to  increase  and  this  tendency  is  more  evident  for  the 
young  farmers.  Compared  to  the  elderly,  young  farmers  tend  to  have  bigger  farms  and  a 
higher  economic  (standard)  output91:  Farmers  under  35  years  old  managed  on  average  110 
hectares (+64% since 2005) compared to 69 hectares for farmers from 55 to 64 years (+41%) 
and 45 hectares for the ones 65 years old, or older (+20%). The average economic output in 
2016 was EUR 218 000 for farmers under 25 years old, EUR 484 000 for farmers between 25 
and 34 years, EUR 226 000 for farmers from 55 to 64 years old and 107 000 EUR for the ones 
aged 65 years or older. Whereas farmers between 25 and 34 years old of age have the highest 
standard  output  per  farm  (+117%  compared  to  2005),  in  2016,  farmers  under  25  years  old 
remain below the average and even decreased (-5% compared to 2005). The data material for 
this category is however limited (40 or 0.1% of the total)92. 

In 2016, 59% of all farmers under 35 years managed a livestock farm, a decrease from 67% 
from 2005. 62% of all farms in Denmark are livestock farms. 

In  2016,  farmers  under  35  years  old  had  the  highest  livestock  intensity  (329  LU  per  farm) 
compared to the Danish average of 180 LU per farm. Farmers above 65 years have 72 LU per 
farm on average93. 

Between 2005 and 2016, the share of young farmers with basic training increased from 51% 
to 58%, compared to a slight increase in EU-28 (21% in 2016). The share of young farmers 
with full training remained around 9% (EU: 22% in 2016). Young farmers tend to be better 
trained  than  the  general  farming  population.  The  share  of  farm  managers  with  full  training 
was only 7% in 2016.94 

The financing gap in the Danish agricultural sector95 is estimated to amount to between EUR 
76 million and EUR 79 million of which about 36% may be attributed to young farmers and 
new entrants.  Access  to  land is  an issue particularly for  young farmers, as buying a farm is 
costly and represents an investment of approximately EUR 3.5 million for an average farm. 

18 

 
 
Availability  of  labour  is  an  increasing  concern  for  Danish  farmers.  The  labour  gap  in 
agriculture  has  soared  from  approximately  6%  in  2015  to  18%  in  2017.  It  is  expected  that 
Denmark  will  lack  numerous  educated  farmers  by  2025.  This  has  resulted  in  large  scale 
recruitment of young people from particularly Eastern Europe96.  

In Denmark, young farmers are currently supported via the top-up payment in Pillar 1 and via 
different  Pillar  2  measures,  which  however  are  not  specifically  targeting  young  farmers. 
Denmark has not programmed any measures under sub-measure 6.1 supporting the set-up of 
young farmers. Pillar 1 support for young farmers absorbs about 0.5% of the direct payment 
expenditure, which is below the EU average. 

Agriculture,  forestry  and  fisheries  are  important  sectors  for  the  employment  in  rural  and 
predominantly  rural  areas,  but  also  industry  and  the  construction  sector  are  important  for 
employment,  according  to  the  Draft  SWOT  for  the  CAP  Strategic  Plan  for  Denmark97. 
Whereas  employment  in  the  primary  sector  in  rural  and  predominantly  rural  areas  has 
decreased, there has been a slight increase in employment in industry98. New business areas 
could have potential in the rural areas99. Relatively more businesses are established in urban 
areas than outside cities, but the share of new businesses operating beyond 5 years is slightly 
higher outside urban areas100. 

Share of farm managers < 35 years by gender in Denmark 

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) 

Graph: Share of farm managers below 35 years of age in Denmark.101 

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

areas, including bio-economy and sustainable forestry 

In  Denmark,  51%  of  the  territory  are  predominantly  rural  areas.  This  is  higher  than  the 
average EU-27 share of 45%. Intermediate regions account for 47% (46% for EU-27)102. 28% 
of the Danish population lives in rural areas. The population in rural areas has increased by 
1.2%  from  2015-2019.  In  urban  areas,  the  increase  is  4.5%103.  The  EU  average  is  a  small 
population decline in rural areas of 0.5%104.  

From 2014 to 2019, rural areas have experienced a 10% increase in people older than 65 years 
for men and 8% for women. In urban areas, the increased share of elderly people is 7% for 
men  and  4%  for  women.  The  share  of  people  younger  than  15  years  in  rural  areas  has 
decreased by 3% for both genders, whereas the figure in urban areas shows an increase of 3% 
equally for both genders105.  

19 

 
 
 
The total employment rate in rural areas for people aged 15-64 years has increased since 2013 
to around 75% in 2019106 and higher for men (78%) than for women (71%). The employment 
rate in total and in rural areas is at the same level. At EU level, the employment in rural areas 
was 68% in 2019. By level of education the employment rate overall is higher in rural areas 
than in cities (2018), and higher for men than for women. In 2017, 4.2% of the employment 
was  in  agriculture,  2.0%  in  the  food  industry,  0.1%  in  forestry,  and  2.0%  in  tourism, 
amounting to 8.3% of the employment in those sectors107. 

The total unemployment rate has been decreasing since 2013, and the unemployment in rural 
areas for people aged 20-64 of below 4% is just a little lower than the total unemployment of 
5%,  in  2019108.  Overall,  the  unemployment  rate  in  rural  areas  is  low  compared  to  the  EU 
average  of  almost  6%.  The  female  rural  unemployment  is  5%.  The  unemployment  among 
young  people  in  rural  areas  (20-24  years  of  age)  is  8%,  and  has  decreased  from  14%  since 
2015.  In  2018,  around  8%  of  young  people  aged  15-24  in  rural  areas  were  neither  in 
employment, nor in education or training. In total, this figure is less than 7%109. 

The GDP per inhabitant in purchasing power standard in Danish rural areas is just above, but 
very  close  to  the  total  EU  average.  In  urban  areas,  however,  the  figure  for  Denmark  is 
significantly above the EU average (around 190 in 2017, with EU=100)110. This means there 
is a significant urban-rural gap of almost 90% in Denmark. Rural areas account for 24% of the 
gross value added (2017); this figure has been stable since 2005. 

As regards the tourism sector, the number of bed places in rural areas has been stable since 
2012 at around 310 000 places (2017), out of a total of 425 000 for the whole of Denmark111. 

When it comes to the poverty rate – people at risk of poverty or social exclusion – it amounts 
to  around  14%  in  rural  areas  (2019)  –  well  below  the  EU-27  average  poverty  rate  of  about 
24%  in  rural  areas  (2018)  –  and  almost  the  same  level  as  in  towns  and  suburbs  (13%),  but 
significantly  lower  than  in  cities  (21%)112.  The  overall  trend  is  that  rural  poverty  has  been 
slightly decreasing since 2005. 

The level of local development and quality of life in rural areas is considered high compared 
to  the  EU  average.  Through  indicators113  such  as  rural  population  participation  in  informal 
voluntary  activities  (44%  in  2015  compared  to  the  EU  average  of  24%)114,  and  rural 
population  participation  in  any  cultural  or  sport  activities  the  last  12  months  (85%  in  2015 
compared  to  the  EU  average  of  60%)115.  The  share  of  people  who  do  not  participate  in 
activities  such  as  cinema,  live  performances  and  cultural  sites  or  sports events  because  it  is 
not possible in the neighbourhood are lower than the EU average116. 

In  the  2014-2020  period,  26  LEADER  Local  Action  Groups  (LAG)  have  been  selected  for 
EAFRD  support117,  covering  56  out  the  total  of  98  Danish  municipalities,  including  small 
islands, and 54% of the rural population118. Several LAGs cover rather large areas and often 
more than one municipality. In 2019, an evaluation of LEADER in Denmark concludes that it 
contributes positively to a balanced territorial development of rural areas through job creation 
and  increased  transition  capacity  among  the  actors  involved,  in  synergy  with  other  public 
support instruments119. 

Only  15%  of  Denmark’s  territory  is  forest,  and  the  employment  in  the  forestry  sector  is 
estimated  at  around  6  000  AWU  (2017)120.  The  productivity  is  just  below  the  EU  average 
with a gross value added per employed person of around EUR 50 000121.  

The  turnover  in  bio-economy  increased  from  2009-2015  by  33%,  amounting  to  EUR  51.7 
billion. In 2015, 52% of this was in the food, beverage and tobacco sector, 19% in bio-based 

20 

 
 
chemicals,  pharmaceuticals,  plastics  and  rubber  (excl.  biofuels),  and  the  agricultural  sector 
accounted for 18%. The turnover per person employed in the bio-economy sector was almost 
EUR 294 000, compared to an EU average of EUR 119 000122. In 2017, 165 000 persons were 
employed in  the bio-economy, of which 62 000  in  agriculture. Turnover  of bio-economy in 
agriculture has grown by 25% from 2008 to 2017, even if growth has been slow since 2014. 
Employment has fallen by 6% over the same period. The draft SWOT points to a potential for 
increased demand for biomass that is produced mainly in rural areas. Furthermore, production 
of  biomass  generally  has  lower  impact  on  environment  and  climate  than  traditional  crops. 
Looking forward, further investments in bio-economy may give opportunities to gain a lead in 
the  development  of  bio-refining  of  proteins.123  Bio-economy  is  also  an  important  option  to 
valorise food waste in agriculture thereby contributing to its reduction. 

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. 

Ensuring  the  safety  of  pesticides  and  controls  on  their  use  is  integral  to  sustainable  food 
production. The Commission has noted that a reduction in the risks posed by pesticides is a 
political priority and there is a high level of social partner and public engagement in this area. 
Nonetheless,  the  implementation  of  Directive  2009/128  remains  a  key  issue,  and  there  is  a 
need to have effective controls on the implementation of the general principles of Integrated 
Pest Management (IPM) for all types of professional users. Denmark has planned additional 
measures to enter into force as of 1 January 2021. 

The  Figures  published  by  the  Danish  authorities  for  the  harmonised  risk  indicator  1  for 
pesticide use shows a decrease in the risk associated with pesticide use of 48% for the period 
2011-2018, compared to a 17% reduction at EU level. This reflects the success of the Danish 
action  plans  relating  to  the  reduction  in  use  of  and/or  the  risks  to  human  health  and  the 
environment  arising  from  pesticides  (see  graph  1).  The  sales  of  pesticides  has  decreased  by 
31% from 2011 to 2018.124 Part of this decrease in the sale and the use of pesticides, could be 
attributed to the differentiated pesticide tax, among other factors. 

Emergency authorisations reflected in HRI 2 varied in Denmark for the last 4.5 years and are 
low  compared  to  other  Member  States.  From  2016  to  mid-2020,  Denmark  had  granted  63 
emergency  authorisations  according 
the  PPPAMS.  Denmark  grants  emergency 
authorisations  only  in  situations  where  there  are  no  alternatives.  Since  2018,  Denmark  has 
granted  emergency  authorisations  for  the  use  of  seeds  for  sugar  beet  treated  with 
neonicotinoids every year. The overall challenge for Denmark is to maintain the positive trend 
in order to meet the Farm to Fork targets.  

to 

Animal welfare is another priority area for the Farm to Fork strategy, which is also vital for 
the sustainability of food systems. The most recent audit report on animal welfare in Denmark 
from 2017125 concludes that actions taken by the Danish authorities have not  yet resulted in 
better  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Pig  Directive  with  regard  to  the  avoidance  of 
routine  tail  docking  of  pigs.  Since  2017  certain  initiatives  has  been  taken  with  the  aim  to 
reduce the number of tail-docked pigs. The action plan for better pig welfare is a long-term 
project needs to make significant efforts to comply with these rules.  

On  antimicrobials,  Denmark  has  one  of  the  lowest  usage  of  antimicrobials  in  the  EU  (see 
graph)  with  an  average  well  below  the  EU  118mg126  per  PCU.  The  latest  audit  report 
127concluded  that  that  there  are  longstanding  and  highly  developed  official  and  voluntary 
(professional  and  industry)  policies  in  place  regarding  the  availability  and  use  of 
antimicrobials  (including  the  critically  important  antimicrobials)  in  animals.  The  challenge 
will be to identify any further actions to keep the use of antimicrobials low.  

21 

 
 
Denmark  has  a  low  consumption  of  fruits  and  vegetables128  with  only  17%  of  the  adult 
population  meeting  The  official  dietary  guidelines  at  600g/day129.  Consumption  patterns 
indicate  a  need  to  further  encourage  consumer  demand  for  healthier  food  choices.  Efforts 
should  focus  on  shifting  towards  healthy  sustainable  diets,  in  line  with  national  tribute  to 
reducing the incidence of non-communicable diseases and improve the overall environmental 
impact of the food system. This would include moving to a more plant based diet with less red 
meat and more fruits and vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts and seeds. 

The  Danish  waste  prevention  program  from  2015130  does  not  address  food  loss  and  waste 
occurring at the primary production level and the early stages of the supply chain. This could 
be addressed in the expected national food waste prevention program131. 

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

Harmonised Risk Indicator 1 for pesticides in Denmark 
(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)132  

        Source: EUROSTAT [aei_hri] 

2.10  Cross-cutting objective on knowledge, innovation and digitalisation 

The agricultural knowledge and innovation system (AKIS) in Denmark is considered strong. 
Denmark’s  farm  advisory  services  are  integrated  in  a  knowledge  and  innovation  system, 
which covers farm advisors, research institutes, public authorities and private companies. The 
AKIS and advisory services are responsive towards the needs of the farmers and the demands 
from public. This cooperation is expected to continue and to be expanded. 

Advisory services in Denmark are provided by the farmer-owned Danish agricultural advisory 
services (DAAS). SEGES, the Danish knowledge centre for agriculture, is part of DAAS, and 
acts  as  the  national  research  and  knowledge  facilitator.  Alongside  the  DAAS  cooperation, 
advisory  services  are  provided  by  several  private  small-size  independent  consultancies.  All 
farmers,  including  non-members,  have  access  to  an  adviser  within  this  system,  and  the  31 
local DAAS advisory centres (with around 2 500 employees) cover all parts of Denmark. The 
system  provides  farmers  and  advisors  with  national  up-to-date  knowledge  and  high-level 
professional advice on all aspects of farming and farm management. 

The agricultural sector brings stakeholders together around development and implementation 
of  research  and  innovation,  in  line  with  the  principles  of  EIP  Operational  Groups133. 
Stakeholders  have been  active in  the European  Innovation Partnership for agriculture  (EIP), 
but only in EIP Focus Groups. There are no EIP Operational Groups set up in Denmark.  

The digital infrastructure is good, and 77% of rural households have access to fast broadband, 
compared  to  96%  of  all  households.  96%  of  the  rural  households  have  access  to  (less  fast) 
broadband134.  Nevertheless,  the  objective  of  100%  fast  broadband  coverage  by  2025  for  all 
households has not been reached yet. Increased connectivity, supported by the CAP or other 
EU  or  national  funds  in  complementarity,  will  further  improve  the  conditions  for  rural 

22 

 
 
businesses  and  quality  of  life  in  rural  areas.  The  share  of  people  with  basic  or  above  basic 
digital skills is well above the EU average, with 70% of the total population135 (EU: 58%136), 
and 62% of the rural population137 (EU: 49%138). 

Overall, the capacity for uptake of new technology is good, and e.g. technology for precision 
farming is used by 25% of farmers. As shown in the draft SWOT139, farmers younger than 50 
years of age use new technology almost twice as much as the rest. With the ageing of farmers 
and fewer young farmers entering the sector, this may lead to less investment in and uptake of 
new technology. 

Under  the  programming  period  2014-2020,  Denmark  programmed  about  4%  of  their  total 
rural  development  envelope  (EAFRD  +  national  contribution)  under  Measure  1:  knowledge 
transfer  and  information  actions  and  Measure  16:  Co-operation.  This  is  around  the  EU-28 
average. 

Broadband coverage in Denmark 

NGA broadband (% of rural households) 

Broadband access (% of rural households) 

NGA broadband (% of total households) 

Graph: Broadband coverage140 

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

Managers with full 
agricultural 
training 

Managers with 
basic agricultural 
training 

Full training EU 
average 

Basic training 
EU average 

Graph: Training of farm managers141 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
1   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. 

2   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Own calculations based on FADN data (up to 

2018). 

3   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. 

4   Directorate  General  for  Agriculture  and  Rural  Development  own  calculations  based  on  FADN  data  (up  to 

2018). 
5   Farm 

Accountancy 

Data 

Network 

(FADN) 

FADN 

standard 

reports 

https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rica/database/consult_std_reports_en.cfm    

6   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development own calculations based on CATS (Clearance of 

Accounts Trailing System) data (up to 2017) 

7   Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development own calculations based on CATS (Clearance of 

Accounts Trailing System) data (up to 2017) 

8   Based on FADN data (farms with an economic size EUR  >15000), the average farm size is 111 ha (2018). 
9   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.17  Agricultural  holdings  (farms).  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmleg]. The average farm size according to the Eurostat definition was 74.6 ha. 

10   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.25  Agricultural  factor  income.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[aact_eaa04], [aact_ali01] and [aact_eaa06] 
European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.26  Agricultural  entrepreneurial  income.  Based  on 
EUROSTAT [aact_eaa04] and [aact_ali01] 

11   European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document – Country Report Denmark 2020. SWD (2020) 

503 final. 

12   https://www.topdanmark.dk/landbrug/landbrugsforsikringer/afgroedeforsikring/ 
13   Directorate-General  for  Agriculture  and  Rural  Development,  ECORYS  and  Wageningen  Economic 
Research.  Study  on  risk  management  in  EU  agriculture.  Publication  Office  of  the  EU,  Brussels  2018.  302 
pages. 

14   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. 

15   The  Danish  Agricultural  Agency,  Ministry  of  Food,  Agriculture  and  Fisheries  of  Denmark.  Draft  SWOT 
analysis. SWOT-analyser om landbrug- og fødevareerhverv i Danmark – Målsætningerne 1 samt A, B og C. 
p.80.  

16   European  Commission.  CAP  context 

indicator  C.08  GDP  per  capita.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[nama_10r_3gdp] and [nama_10r_3popgdp] 

17   European Commission. DG AGRI calculations (for partial productivity),  CAP context indicator C.22 Farm 
labour  force,  based  on  EUROSTAT  [ef_lf_main].  CAP  impact  indicator  I.03  Total  factor  productivity  in 
agriculture, based on EUROSTAT. 

18   European Commission,  CAP  Impact indicator I. 06 Gross fixed capital formation in agriculture. Based on 

EUROSTAT. 

19   Danmarks Statistik. https://www.dst.dk/Site/Dst/Udgivelser/nyt/GetPdf.aspx?cid=31408 
20   The  share  of  farm  managers  below  35  years  was  5,1%  in  2016.  European  Commission.  CAP  context 

indicator C.24 Agricultural training of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT [ef_mp_training]. 

21   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. DG AGRI for partial 
productivity. 

22   European Commission. Analytical factsheet for Denmark: Nine objectives for a future Common Agricultural 

Policy.  

24 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
23   European Commission. Analytical factsheet for Denmark: Nine objectives for a future Common Agricultural 

Policy.  

24   EUROSTAT [prc_ppp_ind]. Price levels for food, beverages and tobacco. 
25   European Commission. DG AGRI Dashboard.  
26   eAmbrosia. The EU geographical indications register. 
27   European  Commission.  CAP  indicators  –  Data  explorer.  CAP  Result  indicator  RPI_03  Value  for  primary 

producers in the food chain. 

28   European Environmental Agency (EEA). EEA greenhouse gas – data viewer. 
29   European Environmental Agency (EEA) [env_air_gge]. 
30   European Environmental Agency (EEA) [env_air_gge]. 
31   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]. 

32   The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark. SWOT-analyser 
om landbrug- og fødevareerhverv i Danmark – Målsætningerne 2 samt D, E &F. (2019) P. 29. Data source: 
EUROSTAT, Greenhouse gas emissions by source sector [env_air_gge], and Slaughtering in slaughterhouses 
– annual data (apro_mt_pann). 

33   European Environmental Agency (EEA) [env_air_gge]. 
34   European Environmental Agency (EEA) [env_air_gge]. 
35   Directorate-General Joint Research Centre. The distribution of peatland in Europe. Mires and Peat, Volume 1 
(2006),  Article  01,  ISSN  1819-754X  2006  International  Mire  Conservation  Group  and  International  Peat 
Society.  

36   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.43  Production  of  renewable  energy  from  agriculture  and 

forestry. Based on EUROSTAT [nrg_bal_c] and [nrg_cb_rw], and Strategie Grains. 

37   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.44  Energy  use  in  agriculture,  forestry  and  food  industry. 

Based on EUROSTAT [nrg_bal_c]. 

38   Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Utilities. Denmark’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan. 

December 2019.  

39   The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and  Fisheries of Denmark. SWOT-analyser 

om landbrug- og fødevareerhverv i Danmark – Målsætningerne 2 samt D, E &F. (2019) P. 28. 

40   The Ministry of Environment and Food of Denmark. Mindre CO2-udledning fra landbrugets og mere natur. 

Regering.dk, 2019.  

41   European Environmental Agency (EEA) [env_air_gge]. 
42   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.45  Emissions  from  agriculture.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 
[env_air_emis],  original  source  European  Environmental  Agency  (UNFCC_v22).  The  laying  hen  sector 
accounts for 2%, and the broilers sector for 1%.  

43   European  Environment  Agency  (EEA).  National  Emission  Ceilings  Directive  emissions  data  viewer  1990-

2018. 

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

Center (JRC) based on LUCAS Land Use Survey 2015.  

45   European Commission. The Environmental Implementation Review 2019. Country Report Denmark. 
46   European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC). Indicators on Soil Erosion.  
47   Borrelli, P., Lugato, E., Montanarella, L. and Panagos, P., 2017.  A new assessment of soil loss due to wind 
erosion in European agricultural soils using a quantitative  spatially distributed modelling approach. Land 
Degradation & Development, 28(1), pp.335-344. 

48   EUROSTAT. Agri-environmental indicator  – tillage practices. Based on Eurobase [ef_mp_prac] for tillage 

practices, partially for arable area and for size of holding, and [ef_lus_main] for arable area. 

49   Denmark is not participating in the data collection on gross nutrient balances and is strongly encouraged to 

transmit its calculations of gross nutrient balances to the Commission. 

50   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.  

51   European Environment Agency. INDICATOR ASSESSMENT Nutrients in freshwater in Europe. 
52   Helsinki Commission. STATE OF THE BALTIC SEA – Second HELCOM holistic assessment 2011–2016. 
53   European  Commission.  Commission  Staff  Working  Document.  Second  River  Basin  Management  Plans  - 

Member State: Denmark. SWD(2019) 38 final.  

54   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. 

55   European Commission.  REPORT FROM THE  COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT on the implementation of Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters 

25 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
 
against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources based on Member State reports for the period 
2012–2015. COM(2018) 257 final.  

56   European  Commission.  DG  AGRI  Dashboard.  Calculation  based  on  European  Commission.  CAP  context 
indicator  C.18  Agricultural  area.  Based  on  EUROSTAT  [apro_cpsh1]  and  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].  

57   EUROSTAT [env_wat_res]. 
58   EUROSTAT [TAI03].  
59   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.45  Emissions  from  agriculture.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[env_air_emis], original source European Environmental Agency (UNFCC_v22). 

60   The  EU  average  does  not  include  all  Member  States.  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.39 

Water abstraction in agriculture. Based on EUROSTAT [env_wat_abs]. 

61   European  Environmental  Agency  (EEA).  Water  exploitation  index  plus  (WEI+)  for  river  basin  districts 

(1990-2015). EUROSTAT. Water exploitation index. 

62   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.40 Water quality. Based on EUROSTAT [aei_pr_gnb]. 
63   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.36  Conservation  status  of  agricultural  habitats.  Original 

source: European Environmental Agency 

64   The  Danish  Agricultural  Agency,  Ministry  of  Food,  Agriculture  and  Fisheries  of  Denmark.  Opgørelse  af 
2020. 

afgrødefordeling 
https://lbst.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/NaturErhverv/Filer/Tilskud/Arealtilskud/Direkte_stoette_-
_grundbetaling_mm/2020/Opgoerelse_af_afgroedefordelingen_2020.pdf 

65   European  Commission.  Dataset  green  deal  targets.  DG  AGRI  based  on  EUROSTAT  and  JRC  based  on 

LUCAS survey.  

66   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.33  Farming  intensity.  Based  on  FADN  –Agri-

environmental indicator “Intensification/Extensification” 

67   EUROSTAT [tai09]. 
68   European Commission. The Environmental Implementation Review 2019. Country Report Denmark.  
69   BirdLife  Europe,  European  Environmental  Bureau  (EEB),  Friends  of  the  Earth  Europe  (FoEE)  and  WWF 
(2018). The State of Implementation of the Birds- and Habitats Directives in the EU - Nature scorecard for 
Denmark. Brussels.  

70   Danish Society for Nature Conservation and WWF Denmark (2017). Biodiversitetsbarometer – Vurdering af 

Danmarks indsats for biodiversitet 2017. Copenhagen. 

71   Danish  EPA  (2017).  Behov  på  naturområdet  –  en  sammenfatning  af  behov  på  naturområdet  baseret  på 

eksisterende viden. Danish EPA, Copenhagen. 

72   European  Commission.  COMMISSION  STAFF  WORKING  DOCUMENT  The  EU  Environmental 

Implementation Review 2019 Country Report – DENMARK. SWD(2019) 134 final.  

73   Moeslund,  J.E.,  Nygaard,  B.,  Ejrnæs,  R.,  Bell,  N.,  Bruun,  L.D.,  Bygebjerg,  R.,  Carl,  H.,  Damgaard,  J., 
Dylmer, E., Elmeros, M., Flensted, K., Fog, K., Goldberg, I., Gønget, H., Helsing, F., Holmen, M., Jørum, P., 
Lissner, J., Læssøe, T., Madsen, H.B., Misser, J., Møller, P.R., Nielsen, O.F., Olsen, K., Sterup, J., Søchting, 
U., Wiberg-Larsen, P. og Wind, P. 2019. Den danske Rødliste. Aarhus Universitet, DCE – Nationalt Center  
for Miljø og Energi. www.redlist.au.dk.https://bios.au.dk/forskningraadgivning/temasider/redlistframe/ 

74   EUROSTAT [aei_fm_salpest09].  
75   EUROSTAT [org_cropar]. 
76   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.31 Land cover. Based on European Environmental Agency, 

Corine Land Cover 2018 

77   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.32 LFA - ANC. Based on EUROSTAT [apro_cpsh1]. 
78   European  Commission.  CAP  context 

indicator  C.38  Protected 

forest.  Original  source:  Forest 

Europe/Unece/FAO - State of Europe's Forests 2015 Report (SoEF 2015), tables A4.14 and A4.15 

79   European Environment Agency. DASHBOARD (TABLEAU) - Conservation status and trends of habitats and 

species. 

80   European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.19  Agricultural  area  under  organic  farming.  Based  on 

EUROSTAT [org_cropar_h1] and [org_cropar]. 

81   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. 

82   *  Landscape  elements:  Linear  elements  considered  here  are  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. 

83   fi-compass,  2020,  Financial  needs  in  the  agriculture  and  agri-food  sectors  in  Denmark,  Study  report,  78 
https://www.fi-compass.eu/sites/default/files/publications/ 

Available 

pages. 
financial_needs_agriculture_agrifood_sectors_Denmark.pdf.  

at: 

26 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
 
84   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 

85   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 

86   Number of farmers aged below 35 years to number of farmers aged 55 years or older; here expressed in 100 

of elderly farmers. 

87   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 

88   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 

89   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 

90   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang]. 
91   See next paragraph. 
92   European Commission. CAP context indicator C.23 Age structure of farm managers. Based on EUROSTAT 

[ef_m_farmang].  

93   Own  calculations  based  on:  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.23  Age  structure  of  farm 

managers. Based on EUROSTAT [ef_m_farmang]. 

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

EUROSTAT [ef_mp_training]. To note that data are available for EU-28 and not EU-27. 

95   The financing gap consists of the unmet financing demand from economically viable enterprises operating in 
the sector. The unmet demand includes lending applied for but not obtained, as well as lending not applied 
for due to the expectation that the financial institution will reject the application. 

96   fi-compass,  2020,  Financial  needs  in  the  agriculture  and  agri-food  sectors  in  Denmark,  Study  report,  78 
https://www.fi-compass.eu/sites/default/files/publications/ 

Available 

pages. 
financial_needs_agriculture_agrifood_sectors_Denmark.pdf.  

at: 

97   The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark.  SWOT-analyser 
om  landbrug-  og  fødevareerhverv  i  Danmark  –  Målsætning  3:  At  styrke  den  socio-økonomiske  struktur  i 
landområderne (2019), p. 21. 

98   The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark.  SWOT-analyser 
om  landbrug-  og  fødevareerhverv  i  Danmark  –  Målsætning  3:  At  styrke  den  socio-økonomiske  struktur  i 
landområderne (2019), p. 37. 

99   The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark.  SWOT-analyser 
om  landbrug-  og  fødevareerhverv  i  Danmark  –  Målsætning  3:  At  styrke  den  socio-økonomiske  struktur  i 
landområderne (2019), p. 32ff. 

100  The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark.  SWOT-analyser 
om  landbrug-  og  fødevareerhverv  i  Danmark  –  Målsætning  3:  At  styrke  den  socio-økonomiske  struktur  i 
landområderne (2019), p. 38. 
101  EUROSTAT [ef_m_farmang]. 
102  EUROSTAT.  The  figures  are  based  on  the  “urban-rural  typology”  in  line  with  the  CAP  common  context 

indicator C.03 Territory [reg_area3] and [urt_d3area]. 

103  European Commission. CAP context indicator C.01 Population. Based on EUROSTAT [demo_r_gind3].  
104  European Commission. CAP context indicator C.01 Population. Based on EUROSTAT [demo_r_gind3]. 
105  EUROSTAT [urt_pjanaggr3]. 
106  European Commission. CAP context indicator C.05 Employment rate. Based on EUROSTAT [lfst_r_ergau]. 
107  European  Commission.  CAP  context 
indicator  C.08  GDP  per  capita.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[nama_10r_3gdp] and [nama_10r_3popgdp]. 

108  European  Commission.  CAP  context  indicator  C.07  Unemployment  rate.  Based  on  EUROSTAT 

[lfst_r_lfu3rt]. 

109  EUROSTAT [edat_lfse_29]. 
110  EUROSTAT [urt_10r_3gdp]. 
111  EUROSTAT [tour_cap_natd]. 
112  EUROSTAT [ilc_peps13]. 
113  The  indicators  mentioned  in  this  paragraph  have  been  collected  for  the  year  2015  only,  which  means  no 

comparison between years is possible. 

114  EUROSTAT [ilc_scp20]. 
115  EUROSTAT [ilc_scp02]. 
116  EUROSTAT [ilc_scp06]. 
117  A few of the LAGs are also supported by the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). 

27 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
 
118  Annual Implementation Report (AIR) of Rural Development Programme of Denmark, 2020. 
119  Oxford Research and the University of Southern Denmark (SDU).  Evaluering af LAG/LEADER 2014-2018 

(2019).  

120  EUROSTAT [for_awu] denominated in Annual Working Units. 
121  European Commission. CAP context indicator C.15 Labour productivity in forestry. Based on EUROSTAT 

[for_eco_cp] and [for_awu]. 

122  Joint Research Center. Data portal of agro-economics Modelling – DataM. Jobs and Wealth in the European 

Union Bioeconomy. 

123  The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark.  SWOT-analyser 
om  landbrug-  og  fødevareerhverv  i  Danmark  –  Målsætning  3:  At  styrke  den  socio-økonomiske  struktur  i 
landområderne (2019), p. 71-72. 
124  EUROSTAT [aei_fm_salpest09].  
125  European Commission - Directorate-General For Health And Food Safety. FINAL REPORT OF AN AUDIT 
CARRIED  OUT  IN  DENMARK  FROM  09  OCTOBER  2017  TO  13  OCTOBER  2017  IN  ORDER  TO 
EVALUATE  MEMBER  STATE  ACTIVITIES  TO  PREVENT  TAIL-BITING  AND  AVOID  ROUTINE  TAIL-
DOCKING OF PIGS. 

126  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. 

127  European  Commission  -  Directorate-General  For  Health  And  Food  Safety.  FINAL  REPORT  OF  A  FACT-

FINDING MISSION 
CARRIED  OUT  IN  DENMARK  FROM  01  FEBRUARY  2016  TO  05  FEBRUARY  2016  IN  ORDER  TO 
GATHER INFORMATION ON THE PRUDENT USE OF ANTIMICROBIALS IN ANIMALS. 

128  EUROSTAT [hlth_ehis_fv3c]. 
129  DTU  Fødevareinstituttet  (2015):  Danskernes  kostvaner  2011-2013,  Danmarks  Tekniske  Universitet, 

Copenhagen 

130  The Danish Government. Denmark without Waste II. A Waste Prevention Strategy. (2015). 
131  As required by Article 29(2a) of the Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC. 
132  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. 

133  The  Danish  Agricultural  Agency,  Ministry  of  Food,  Agriculture  and  Fisheries  of  Denmark.  Det  danske 

landdistriktsprogram 2014-2020. (The Danish Rural Development Programme 2014-2020). 

134  European  Commission.  Digital  Economy  and  Society  Index.  DESI  individual  indicators  –  1b1  Fast  BB 

(NGA) coverage [desi_1b1_fbbc]  

135  European Commission. Data visualisation tool – Digital scoreboard – Key Indicators. 
136  European Commission. Data visualisation tool – Digital scoreboard – Key Indicators. 
137  European Commission. Data visualisation tool – Digital scoreboard – Key Indicators. 
138  European Commission. Data visualisation tool – Digital scoreboard – Key Indicators.  
139  The Danish Agricultural Agency, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries of Denmark. SWOT-analyser 

om landbrug- og fødevareerhverv i Danmark – Målsætningerne 1 samt A, B & C. (2019) P. 90.  

140  European  Commission.  Digital  Economy  and  Society  Index.  DESI  individual  indicators  –  1b1  Fast  BB 

(NGA) coverage [desi_1b1_fbbc]  

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

EUROSTAT [ef_mp_training]. 

28