Print
Common Agriculture Policy
)
Species like the corncrake are sensitive to changes in farming methods
Since the Second World War, our rural landscape has changed dramatically. Farming practices have become increasingly intensive - field size has increased, there are high levels of chemical inputs including fertiliser and pesticides, and there has been a move to specialisation with farms concentrating on either livestock or crop production.
Farmers have been able to achieve an almost fourfold increase in crop yields since 1945 and whilst food production is critically important, this has come at the cost of a dramatic reduction in landscape diversity and environmental quality, with widespread declines in the populations of many farmland bird species and other wildlife.
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was a significant factor driving the intensification of farming. Created in the 1950s, it aimed to provide farmers in the European Economic Community with a reasonable income and a secure, affordable supply of food to consumers.
Through subsidies and price guarantees the CAP was so successful in stimulating higher levels of production that soon the EU had to contend with massive food surpluses – the famous butter and beef 'mountains' of the 1980s and 1990s.
The policy had become unacceptably expensive, harmful to producers outside the EU, and was not in the best interests of farmers and consumers even within the EU. It was also causing serious and widespread harm to the environment and there was growing recognition that this could not continue.
Reform
Reform of the CAP began in the 1980s with the introduction of production limits, and continued through the 1990s with an increasing emphasis on more environmentally sustainable farming.
In 1999, the CAP was split into the two 'Pillars' we have today: Pillar 1 which consists of direct payments to farmers to support their income, and Pillar 2, the Rural Development pillar. The 1999 reforms were particularly important as they required every Member State to introduce agri-environment schemes under the Rural Development Pillar, which farmers could then join voluntarily, and receive rewards for implementing more wildlife-friendly farming methods.
Further reforms in 2003 introduced the important principle of decoupling subsidy from production, removing the incentive to over-produce and allowing farmers to be more responsive to market conditions. The 2003 CAP reform also introduced 'cross-compliance', a set of minimum environmental, animal welfare and safety standards which farmers have to meet to receive their payments.
Proper funding for the management of Natura 2000 sites, the EU network of sites for nature conservation, can also be supported by CAP funds, and are available to any Member State keen to help farmland biodiversity.
A vital role for nature
In the UK, the CAP is crucial to help address biodiversity declines and other environmental challenges particularly through agri-environment schemes in each of the four UK countries.
There have been some successes with schemes targeted at specific species. For example, the national breeding population of cirl buntings increased from 319 pairs in 1992 to nearly 700 in 2003 following a special agri-environment project. However, despite these efforts many farmland bird species such as the skylark, corn bunting, grey partridge and turtle dove continue to decline.
Still room for improvement
The CAP has improved significantly since the early days of maximised production, but there is still a long way to go before the policy truly meets the needs of farmers, consumers and the environment. Across the UK and wider EU, farmers' payments are still often calculated on past production levels with the highest payments going to intensively managed farms whilst extensive, wildlife-friendly farming systems often get a much poorer deal.
Cross-compliance standards, although an important concept, are fairly undemanding, and have not yet met their potential to provide genuine benefits for the environment and wildlife.
The CAP represents an enormous public investment in agriculture and rural areas and yet the majority of its budget is spent on direct payments, which have no clear policy aim and bring limited social and environmental benefits. Only about 37 per cent of CAP spending goes to Rural Development Policies, with less still going to targeted agri-environment schemes.
The RSPB believes that protecting farmland wildlife, and traditional European landscapes, along with conserving the natural resources to ensure long-term food production, must be the core objective of the CAP.
By rewarding farmers who integrate environmental protection and enhancement into their day to day business, the CAP can provide benefits not just for the environment, but for farming incomes and the long-term sustainability of the farming sector, can and ensure that the policy is in line with society's expectations from the countryside.
Working with BirdLife partner organisations and other stakeholders across the UK, the RSPB advocates this policy change to EU governments and decision makers.
References
Robinson, R.A., Sutherland, W.J. (2002) Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. Journal of Applied Ecology 39: 157–176.
Natural England publication: Agri-environment schemes in England 2009. A review of results and effectiveness.
Last modified: 01 April 2011