The CAP and EU Rural Policy – review processes and issues for AONBs

1. The CAP and EU Rural Policy – review processes and issues for AONBs Janet Dwyer Countryside and Community Research Institute, UK

2. Outline • Policy reform • EU picture and key elements • UK process • Implications for AONBs • Coping with reform impacts • Maximising the value of funding opportunities

3. Policy reform: EU processes • 2003 CAP Mid-Term Review • still working its way through implementation • ‘unfinished business’, for EC: variable implementation between countries • 2008-9 CAP ‘Health Check’ • to even out the extent of travel…. Not same as the MTR • 2009 Budgetary review • What should Europe fund, and why? • 2014- new period • What role and scale, CAP pillar 1/ pillar 2, Regional funding?

4. EU process: where now? • CAP reform: 2008-9 ‘Healthcheck’ • Legislative proposals under debate, to agree end ’08 (?) • - more decoupling (mainly arable, dairy impacts), Art. 69 • ‘compulsory modulation’ – p1 to p2 - at [?]13% for EU15 • Steady increase in Rural Development resources, for all ‘axes’ (competitiveness, environment, rural economy) • declining ‘real value’ CAP support for EU15, growing for new Member States, 2008 - 2013 • But UK impacts likely to be minimal • no new money for RD - voluntary modulation • no Treasury enthusiasm for changes • competitive position impacts vis-à-vis others

5. CAP Healthcheck (cont) • Refining pillar 2: • 2009- focus on ‘new challenges’ – water, biodiversity, energy/climate change (but not in UK?) • ‘Stronger, simpler’ cross-compliance – buffer strips, removal of the cattle ID requirements, • UK is pressing for arable management option in recompense for loss of set-aside…. • Reactions so far: • Some strong disagreements on aspects, esp. modulation • French have the Presidency - not keen

6. EU budget review and post-2013 policy • Key issues: • What is legitimately an EU policy concern? • What are MS prepared to pool their resources for? • How much should funds only target the poorest? • The UK government view is already clear, and simple - CAP becomes ‘public goods’ alone, RD funds needed only for the poorest MS • - it is not representative, but it gives an idea of how our policymakers will think / act • - it should not be assumed that it will prevail!

7. UK processes - Policy Evaluation • This time, the MTE sits within a wider ‘ongoing evaluation’ process – but must still be independently commissioned. Ex-post currently in progress, MTE in 2010. • UK scheme reviews could be more important for RDP evolution - - ES in 2009-10, Tir Gofal also? HFA to UELS this year, ongoing debates re Tir Mynydd, …….. - Future role and funding of RDAs may change

8. UK processes - modifications to RDPs • EC permission only for amendments involving significant changes in programmes e.g. • shifts of funding across Axes, • changes to EAFRD cofinancing rates, Max 1 application per year, 6 month turnaround • Other amendments can be decided by Member States and notified to the Commission in the annual reports • Changes to schemes, new measures, within axis 3/year, 4 months for EC to object – if not, OK

9. Implications for AONBs (1) – coping with 2003 impacts • Land-use – affected by policy and markets • Continuing high-productivity farming in some zones & sectors, increasing marginalisation in others, growing competitive pressures from other parts of EU • - Dairy concentration in SW, possible decline / collapse of traditional hill farming, arable simplification continues, some novel crops…. • New users and new purposes in accessible rural areas: • - Counter-urbanisation, leisure, horses, nature space • Sensitive to credit crunch, financial uncertainty? • Other policies also important

10. Implications for AONBs (2)– coping with ongoing UK schemes / reforms England • Issues regarding those leaving CSS and ESAs who cannot enter HLS • UELS concerns - commons, CSS/ESA, other issues: are we overcomplicating the approach? • how to make the best of ELS – scope for active support Wales • Tir Mynydd replacement Both • Developing water policy agenda - more Regs?

11. Impications for AONBs (3): Energy & climate policy • Short-term (1-5 years) • Another market for arable cropping, sugar • Longer term (3+ years) • Lower cost products from ‘1st generation’ stocks outside EU • Possible rejuvenation of markets for 2nd generation perennial ‘crops’ (woodland), wastes, also new features (SRC, etc): much depends upon supply chain developments (CHP, access to grid) • More land-take for wind, solar, hydro…. • Initiatives to protect peat

12. Making the most of funding • Need to enhance accessibility of main schemes (help to understand them, time to plan ahead) • Consider top-ups / linkages to other funds for environmental investment – work with RDAs, sub-regional partnerships, LEADER • Link to food chain developments – branding, outlets, tourist routes, visitor facilities • How to protect what we have built: relations with farmers, key environmental capital, SD potential – influence NE / FC / WAG, demonstrate locally

13. Trail-blazers for the next decade? Food and enjoyment - making the links…. Regional products trail, PNR Chartreuse, France Micro-regional marketing, Regionen Aktiv, Germany

14. Trail-blazers for the next decade? ‘New environmental economy’ Recycling New markets for old techniques A market for carbon storage…