Annexe 33 - Etude de cas Castilla la Mancha

Comm/Agri

Informations

• Publié par: Juviz
• Nombre de lectures: 88
• Langue: English

Extrait

 

                       

Departamento de Proyectos y Planificación Rural Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM)                   EVALUATION DES MESURES AGRO-ENVIRONNEMENTALES   AGRI/ G4/ 2004          A NNEXE 33   :   E TUDE DE CAS C ASTILLA L A M ANCHA    

Novembre 2005

  Departamento de Proyectos y Planificación Rural (ETSIA). UPM. Avda. Complutense s/n – tél. : [phone] – Fax : [phone] -

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

T ABLE OF CONTENTS  

  1.   T HE REGION ................................................................................................................... 1   2.   A GRI - ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES IN THE REGION ..................................................... 4   2.1.   Legislation evolution in Castilla-La-Mancha................................................................. 4   2.2.   The agri-environmental programmes in Castilla-La-Mancha ..................................... 5   3.   W ATER QUANTITY ......................................................................................................... 7   4.   A NSWER TO EVALUATION QUESTIONS ......................................................................... 10   4.1.   Theme nº 1: Environmental impacts of agro-environmental measures - Sub-theme nº 1: biodiversity ............................................................................................................ 10   4.1.1.   Q 1: To what extent has biodiversity (species richness) been maintained or enhanced by agro- environmental measures ?.......................................................................................................... 10   4.1.2.   Q 2: To what extent have habitats been maintained or enhanced by agri-environmental measures?................................................................................................................................... 12   4.1.3.   Q 3: to what extent have genetic resources been maintained or enhanced by agri-environmental measures through the safeguarding of endangered breeds or plant varieties ? .......................... 14   4.2.   Theme nº 1: Environmental impacts of agri-environmental measures - Sub-theme nº 2: Natural resources....................................................................................................... 15   4.2.1.   Q 4: To what extent has water quality been maintained or enhanced by agricultural measures? ................................................................................................................................................... 15   4.2.2.   Q 5: To what extent has water quantity been maintained or enhanced by agricultural measures? ................................................................................................................................................... 16   4.2.3.   Q 6 : To what extent has soil quality been maintained or enhanced, and soil eorion been prevented by agri-environmental measures ? ............................................................................ 24   4.2.4.   Q 7 : To what extent have agri-environmental measures had impacts on other environmental resources not covered above (e.g. air, …) or has other e nvironmental impacts not listed?....... 25   4.3.   Theme nº 1 : Environmental impacts of agri-environmental measures - Sub-theme nº 3: Landscape .............................................................................................................. 25   4.3.1.   Q 8 : to what extent have rural landscapes been maintained or enhanced by agri-environmental measures ?.................................................................................................................................. 25   4.4.   Theme nº 2a: Institutional and contextual issues which determine the success of agri-environmental policy ............................................................................................. 27   4.4.1.   Q 9: To what extent have institutional structures and working methods at all levels in the Member states facilitate/hindered the construction of good quality agri-environmental programmes and measures? ....................................................................................................... 27   4.4.2.   Q 10: To what extent is funding for agri-environmental programmes and measures adequate (e.g. in the EU contribution, Member states budget, Regional budget, payment levels for farmers, etc.) and how has the level of funding influenced uptake and programme quality ?... 28   4.4.3.   Q 11: To what extent is the monitoring, evaluation and control of agri-environmental measures in place in the Member states adequate to the task? To what extent have the results of monitoring and evaluation been used to improve programmes? What lessons can be learned from best practices on monitoring, evaluation and control? ...................................................... 29   4.4.4.   Q 12: To what extent have other implementation or contextual factors (such as the attitude towards/knowledge about agri-environment at all levels in the Member states, the level of GFP, other CAP/EU measures, minimum 5-years contracts, farmers as the only beneficiaries, etc.) influenced programmes uptake and environment effectivness? ................................................ 30       4.5.   Theme nº 2b: Economic efficiency of measures. Payment mechanism...................... 31    

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

4.5.1.   there in the budget spending and the administrative effort ofQ 13: What differences are different measures having similar environmental outcomes? How could less efficient measure be improved? What lessons can be learned from very efficient measures (best practices)? ..... 31   4.5.2.   Q 14: Is the present way of applying payment mechanism (based on costs incurred plus income foregone plus an incentive where necessary) suited to achieving the desired environmental outcome? Do payment reflect costs incurred and income foregone? Are incentive payments when used, being justified? Can any improvements be suggested to the payment mechanism, which would maintain compatibility with WTO rules? ............................................................. 32   4.6.    measures .............. 33Theme nº 3: The socio-economic impact of agri-environmental   4.6.1.   Q 15 : To what extent have agri-environmental measures provided farmers with opportunity of a gainful activity (provision of environmental services)? To what extent have they contributed to enhancing the image of agriculture as a provider of services to society?.............................. 33   4.7.   nº 4: Objectives and targeting of agri-environmental measures ................... 34Theme   4.7.1.   Q 16: To what extent agri-environmental measures designed with clear environmental objectives? To what extent have Member states and Regions chosen to target their agri- environmental measures to areas and topics covered by Community environmental legislation or objectives? ............................................................................................................................. 34   5.   C ONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................... 36  

A P ........................................................................................................................ 37  

EPDNCISE

........................................................................................................................ 37   Annexe 1: Guides of interview for regional studies................................................................. 38   Interview guide for farmers 1 ................................................................................................................. 38   Interview guide for farmers 2 ................................................................................................................. 41   Interview guide for farmers 3 ................................................................................................................. 45   Interview guide for farmers 4 ................................................................................................................. 50   Interview guide for farmers 5 ................................................................................................................. 53   Annex 2: List of people met ....................................................................................................... 58      

 

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha T ABLE OF TABLES     Table 1: Protected Areas in Castilla- La Mancha by Spanish State. ..................................................................2 Table 2: Agri-environmental measures in Castilla-La-Mancha. ........................................................................4 Table 3: plemented Measures of the First Spanish Programme in Castilla-La-Mancha (1993- 1998) ..............5 Table 4: Implemented Measures of the Second Spanish Programme in Castilla- La Mancha (2000- 2004).....6 Table 5: Number of agreement holders from 1993 til 2004. (Programme of Income Compensation which includes d6 measure (First Spanish AE Programme 1993- 2003) and 7.1. measure (Second Spanish AE Programme 2003-2004).................................................................................................................8 Table 6: Number of Beneficiaries and Amount of expenditure concerning the "Cerealistic habitat restoration for steppic birds Programme" ............................................................................................................10 Table 7: Level of implementation of AEM with the aim to maintain or enhance common biodiversity.........11 Table 8: Comparison of the level of implementation of the agri-environmental concerning cerealistic habitats of steppic birds in Castile la Mancha and Castile Leon.....................................................................11 Table 9: Level of implementation of AEM with the aim to maintain or enhance habitats. ............................14 Table 10: Level of implementation of AEM with the aim to maintain or enhance water quality...................16 Table 11: Number of agreement holders, area (ha) under AEM d6 or 7 contract, and amount of expenditure from 1993 till 2003 (1993-2000: pesetas; 2001-2004: euros). ..........................................................18 Table 12: Level of application of AEM with the aim to maintain or enhance water quantity. ........................19 Table 13: Acceptance of AEM d6. Irrigation water saving in wetlands .........................................................20 Table 14: Level of implementation of AEM regarding Organic farming ........................................................24     T ABLE OF FIGURES     Figure 1: Map of Spanish Regions. Castilla- La Mancha highlited ...................................................................1 Figure 2: Map of implementation of d6 measure (includes in The Programme of Income Compensation) of the First Spanish AE Programme (1993- 1998). .................................................................................8 Figure 3: Implementation of AEM regarding water saving (source: own work: Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. Volumen 2. MAPA, Enero 2000 (Data 1993-1996). .................................19 Figure 4: Extensification of high demanding water crops (Source: Own work from Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. MAPA, 2000.)............................................................................................ 22 Figure 5: Water saving (Source: Own work from Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. MAPA, 2000.).................................................................................................................................................22  Figure 6: Water saving (Source: Own work from Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. MAPA, 2000.).................................................................................................................................................23  Figure 7: Evolution of the piezometric level of aquifer 23 and Tablas de Daimiel flooded area (Source: Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. MAPA, 2000.) ..................................................23 Figure 8: Evolution of the flooded area and the number of birds in Tablas de Daimiel National Park. (Source: Evaluación del Programa Agroambiental Español. MAPA, 2000.) ..................................................24  

 

        AEM AE CAP CCAA: EAGGF EC EU FEGA MAPA PCR RD RDR ZEPA    

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

G LOSSARY  

Agrienvironmental measures Agrienvironmental Common Agricultural Policy Comunidades Autónomas: Autonomous Comunities. (NUTS II Spanish territorial divisi ) 1    on European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund European Community European Union Fondo Español de Garantía Agraria: Spanish Agency in Charge of UE agricultural aids payment. Ministerio de Agricultura pesca y Alimentación: Spanish Agriculture Fishering and Food Ministry Programa de Compensación de Rentas Real Decreto: Royal decree: Highest rank of common Spanish legislation. Rural Deveolopment Regulation Zona de especial protección de aves: Special Bird Protection Area.

                                                      1 divided in 17 CCAA and two Autonomous Cities (Ceuta and Mellilla).Spain is  

 

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

1. THE REGION Castilla- La Mancha is one of the seventeen Autonomic Communities of Spain. This region is 79.463 Km 2 and it has five provinces (Guadalajara, Toledo, Ciudad Real, Albacete and Cuenca). It is a region Objective n o the AE measures are co-financed up to 12.5%.1 which means that Figure 1: Map of Spanish Regions. Castilla- La Mancha highlited  

Ciudad Real

  Source :   The Tajo and Guadiana rivers go across the region which is divided by Toledo Mountains. Castilla- La Mancha is surrounded by Central mountain range to northwest, Ibérico mountain range to notheast and Morena mountains to South. It is continental Mediterranean climate The population is nearly 2 million people with a density of 23.3 inhabitants/km 2 . Regarding activity rate, the service- producing sector is the most important (56.65 %), and the agronomic sector is the less (9.1%). However, the agronomic sector plays an important role in the region. The National Network of Protected Areas in Castilla- La Mancha establishes different categories of protection: Microreserve (Microreserva), Natural Park (Parque Natural), Natural Site (Paraje Natural), Nature Reserve (Reserva Natural), Natural Monuments (Monumentos Naturales) and River Reserve (Reserva Fluvial).This is showed in the table below. The are 196.267 Has., it means 2.5% total area is protected.

1

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

Table 1: Protected Areas in Castilla- La Mancha by Spanish State.

 

 

2

  

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

Source: “Anuario EUROPARC- España del estado de los espacios naturales protegidos”. 2004

 

  Ciudad Real is 19.813 Km 2 , it means is the largest province of Castilla- La Mancha, although regarding population it holds the second place.   On the other hand, as it is showed above the most Natural Protected Areas in Castilla- La Mancha are in Ciudad Real, as well as the Natural Park called “Las Tablas de Daimiel” which is very important regarding quantity water.  

3

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

2. AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES IN THE REGION

2.1. Legislation evolution in Castilla-La-Mancha The incorporation into regional law of Council Regulation (EC) Nº 2078/1992 and the current Nº 1257/1999 has been complicated due to the numerous possibilities, measures and sub-measures that exist. The figure below shows the evolution of the regional law regarding MAEs during the period covered by the evaluation. Table 2: Agri-environmental measures in Castilla-La-Mancha. EUROPEAN UNION CASTILLA- LA MANCHA Orden of 17 March 1993 (d6 Measure: irrigation water in wetlands) Orden of 5 March 1996 (d6 Measure)   Orden of 6 March 1998 (d6 Measure)   Orden of 24 March 1995 (establishing the payments regime to promote agricultural practices compatible with environmental protection of Special Birds Habitats)   Orden of 29 December 1995 (H1 Measure: To promote extensive agriculture)   Council Regulation (EC)  Orden of 19 February 1996 (establishing the payments regime to Nº 2078/1992  adopt agricultural practices compatible with protection of National Park of Cabañeros Habitat)   Orden of 10 April 1997 (establishing the payments regime to farmers in the influential area of National Park of Cabañeros, to promote agricultural practices compatible with environmental protection of this area)   Orden of 22 May 1996 (establishing the payments regime to promote agri-environmental training and to promote organic farming)   Orden of 15 January 2001 (To promote extenfication of agriculture: environmental actions into the crop: sunflower crops)   Orden of 8 May 2001   Resolution of 27 December 2001 Orden of 27 December 2001 Orden ARP/26/2002   Orden of 25 January 2002 (To promote agricultural practices compatible with environmental protection and conservation of irrigated areas into Mancha Occidental Area and Campo de Montiel Council Regulation (EC)  Area) Nº 1257/1999  Orden of 23 April 2002 (To promote organic agriculture)   Orden of 26 December 2002 (To promote organic agriculture)   Orden of 30 December 2002 (To promote extenfication of agriculture: environmental actions into the crop: sunflower crops)   Resolution of 30 December 2002 Orden of 20 February 2003 (Establishing the payments regime to protect autochthonous endangered breeds)   Orden of 25 February 2003 (Establishing the payments regime to save water in irrigated areas of Mancha Occidental Area and Campo de Montiel Area   Source: Own elaboration

4

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha 2.2.   The agri-environmental programmes in Castilla-La-Mancha Taking into account the extreme situation of 23 and 24 aquifers of Alto Guadiana Area, the Government of Castilla- La Mancha was obliged to elaborate the Income Compensation Programme (Programa de Compesación de Rentas (PCR)) in 1992 to support farmer for saving irrigation water. That Programme was previous to the First Spanish Agro environmental Programme, but thePCRwas part of the First Spanish AE Programme in 1993. As it is explained in the Spanish National Report, the First Spanish AE Programme consisted of four Horizontal Measures and eight Specific Measures. In the table below is showed the evolution of implementation both Horizontal and Specific Measures. Table 3: plemented Measures of the First Spanish Programme in Castilla-La-Mancha (1993- 1998) MEASURES Nº Beneficiaries Area (Ha) Payments (€) H1: To promote extensive agriculture 2.578 80.146 2.313.896 H2: To promote agroenvironmental training 421 - 39.065 H4: To promote organic farming 94 5.315 408.087 PCR in ir   r 2 i 3 g   a a t n io d  n 2   4 w   a a t q e u r  i i f n e   r w s  e ( t D la 6 n :  s T )  o save  2.610 84.845 23.524.214  Conservation of National Park of Cabañeros D1: Flora and Fauna protection in extensive agriculture systems D3: Landscape consevation and fire prevention in extensive grazing systems 415 F: Set aside land under cultivation to be used for environmental purposes for at least 20 years G: Land management for public access Conservation of Special Birds Habitat: D1: Flora and Fauna protection in extensive F: Set aside l a a g n r d i   c u u n lt d u e r r e     c s u y l s ti te va m ti s  on to be used  243  for environmental purposes for at least 20 years TOTAL 6.361 219.957 28.480.160 Source: Own elaboration from data of Dirección General de Desarrollo Rural of Junta Castilla- La Mancha   Castilla- La Mancha compared to the other Spanish Regions is the largest regarding budget to implement the Agro-environnemental Measures (30%). In addition, around 5% of cultivated areas are included in AE Measures, but it is still far away the European average which is 20%. The Second Spanish AE Programme has been implemented in three stages. The first one was the promotion of extensification of agriculture (measure 1.3.: environmental actions into the crop rotation: sunflower crop) in 2001. The second stage was carried out the 3.3 measure ( to promote organic agriculture) in 2002. Finally, in 2003, 9.2 measure (to protect autochthonous endangered breeds) and 7.1 measure (Efficient management of water in wetlands a subterranean water) were opened.  

5

45.609 1.862.536

4.042 332.359

Etude de cas Castilla-La-Mancha

Table 4: Implemented Measures of the Second Spanish Programme in Castilla- La Mancha (2000- 2004) MEASURES Opening  Nº Beneficiaries  Dat  2000 2001 2002  2003 2004 e 1.3.Environmenta l a c c r t o i p o   n r s o   t in ti t o o  n t : hr  30/01/2001 3.071 2.446 4.091 12.934 3.946  a sunflower crop 3.3.- To promote organic 06/05/2002 No opened No opened 883 659 1054 agriculture 7.1.- Efficient managament of water in wetlands 26/03/2003 No opened No opened No opened 906 793 and subterranean water 9.2.- To protect authocthonous endangered 12/03/2003 No opened No opened No opened 38 46 breeds Source: Intermediate Evaluation of the Second Spanish AE Programme. (2000-2003). Monitoring Report of Second Spanish AE Programme (2003 and 2004)   During the implementation of the Second Spanish AE Programme shows up the importance of the 1.3 measure and 3.3 measure. Although the 7.1 measure was no opened until 2003, it has been developed as d6 measure belongs to the First Spanish AE Programme.    

6