The Convention on Biodiversity and Its Potential Implications for the Agricultural Sector in Europe

Transcription

1 SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME PRIORITY 8: Policy-Oriented Research SPECIFIC TARGETED RESEARCH PROJECT n SSPE-CT Impact of Environmental Agreements on the CAP Document number: MEACAP WP5 D2 Dissemination level: public The Convention on Biodiversity and Its Potential Implications for the Agricultural Sector in Europe Authors: Zdanowicz A., Miller C., Baldock D. Author s Organisation(s): Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) Date: March 2005

2 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION General objectives and principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity The European Community as a Party to the CBD The CBD and agriculture BIODIVERSITY POLICY IN THE EU Background European Community Biodiversity Strategy Biodiversity Action Plans Biodiversity Action Plan for Agriculture Biodiversity Action Plan for Natural Resources Review of EC Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans Biodiversity in the Common Agricultural Policy National biodiversity strategies and action plans Monitoring and evaluation OBLIGATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL POLICY UNDER THE CBD REFERENCES

3 1 INTRODUCTION It is widely acknowledged that global biological diversity (biodiversity) is declining. In response to growing recognition of the values of biodiversity, the United Nations Environment Programme convened a working group of experts on the subject in The work of this group culminated in the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (UN, 1992). Under the Treaty of Amsterdam, which entered into force on 1 May 1999, the overall objectives of the European Community include sustainable economic development and a high level of protection and improvement of the environment. As agricultural land in Europe occupies around 45 percent of the terrestrial area, and the extent of natural habitats is now very small, there is no question about the importance of agricultural policy in influencing the state of biodiversity in the EU-25. European agriculture has created an environment where a range of endemic and threatened species have survived at a certain level. This is the case for the chough (Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax) whose survival depends on the maintenance of traditional grazing in certain parts of Europe, and the great bustard (Otis tardo) in Spain and Portugal. It is estimated that 70 percent of vascular plants in Sweden depend on an open and varied agricultural landscape. This paper introduces the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and aims at presenting commitments of the Parties to the Convention, which relate to agricultural activities and resources directly used or affected by agriculture. The commitments at EU level are analysed in more detail. 1.1 General objectives and principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was signed in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro and has been ratified or acceded to by more than 180 parties. The Convention has three main goals: the conservation of biodiversity; sustainable use of the components of biodiversity; and sharing the benefits arising from the commercial and other utilisation of genetic resources in a fair and equitable way. The substantive provisions of the CBD are translated into binding commitments in Articles 6 to 20. These articles contain key provisions on, among others: measures for the conservation of biological diversity, both in situ and ex situ; incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity; research and training; public awareness and education; assessing the impacts of projects upon biological diversity; regulating access to genetic resources; access to and transfer of technology; and the provision of financial resources. In addition to its substantive provisions, the CBD establishes institutional arrangements to provide a mechanism to monitor its progress and facilitate further developments. Three institutions are established by the CBD: the Conference of the Parties (COP), the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice 3

4 (SBSTTA) and the Secretariat. In addition, the CBD establishes a financial mechanism for the provision of financial resources to developing country Parties. The jurisdictional scope of the CBD is stated in Article 4. Its provisions apply to components of biological diversity within the limits of national jurisdiction of the Parties. It also applies to processes and activities carried out under the control of Parties both within and beyond their national jurisdictions. It calls for cooperation between its Parties, directly or through the appropriate international organisations to address areas beyond national jurisdictions for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Under the CBD governments undertake to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity. They are required to develop national strategies and action plans, and to integrate these into broader strategies for the environment and development. This is particularly important in sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, energy, forestry, transportation and urban planning. Other treaty commitments include: identifying and monitoring the components of biodiversity that need to be conserved and used sustainably; establishing protected areas to conserve biodiversity while promoting environmentally sound development around these areas; rehabilitating and restoring degraded ecosystems and promoting the recovery of threatened species in collaboration with local residents; respecting, preserving and maintaining traditional knowledge of the sustainable use of biodiversity with the involvement of indigenous peoples and local communities; preventing the introduction of, controlling, and eradicating alien species that could threaten ecosystems, habitats or species; controlling the risks posed by organisms modified by biotechnology; promoting public participation, particularly when it comes to assessing the environmental impacts of development projects that threaten biodiversity; educating people and raising awareness about the importance of biodiversity and the need to conserve it; and reporting on how each country is meeting its biodiversity goals. At the sixth meeting of the COP (2002) a more definite goal relating to the three objectives of the Convention was adopted: to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth. This target was subsequently endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development. A brief review of the legal obligations under the CBD is presented in Annex The European Community as a Party to the CBD The European Community ratified the CBD on 21 December An attached Declaration states that the EC alongside its Member States has competence to take actions aimed at protecting the environment. All EU-25 Member States are individual parties to the CBD. As a consequence, they have already developed national biodiversity strategies, or are in the process of doing 4

5 so. Many Member States have established a national biodiversity coordinating body or committee. Box 1: European Union Competence and International Conventions It is generally the European Community (EC) rather than the European Union (EU) that is able to sign and ratify international conventions. Article 174 of the Treaty of Nice provides the legal basis for the Community to conclude agreements in the environmental field by stating that EC policy on the environment shall contribute to objectives including promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems. The EC is a party to the CBD and several other regional biodiversity conventions. In effect, this means that the EC is committed, separately from and in addition to the Member States, to implementing the CBD. In negotiating, signing or concluding conventions, the Commission represents the EC. The process usually starts with the Commission seeking Council authority to negotiate on behalf of the EC to become a party to an existing convention or to take part on the behalf of the EC in the negotiations leading to a new convention. Decisions to sign and conclude (ie ratify or accede to) agreements are taken by the Council. The European Parliament has merely to be informed of negotiations and signature, and must normally only be consulted on proposals to conclude agreements. This contrasts with the situation in many countries where the national parliament, has to give consent before ratification of a treaty or convention. The general policy adopted by the Commission in the area of international agreements is to seek Community participation wherever it can be established that the Community has competence, ie where it has powers to do so. Competence can be a complex matter, but, according to the ruling of the European Court of Justice (Case 22/70 ERTA), where the Community has adopted internal measures that cover the same areas as those in a convention, or even aspects of areas covered by a convention, there will be competence. For example, the Community has external competence in those areas covered by the birds and habitats Directives (see Section 2.1). Thus, external powers in the international domain expand without the express approval of the Member States, simply in the course of developing the EC s internal legislation. In relation to many multilateral environmental conventions, including the CBD, competence is shared between the Member States and the Community. This means that the Commission represents the EC almost as if it were a separate State. The Member States are represented by the Council Presidency or represent themselves. Competence is an important issue for the Member States, and one that is often contested. Problems can and do arise over whether the Community has competence, and over the extent of the competence when it is agreed to exist. This can be a particular issue when treaties cover different subjects, eg both trade and biodiversity conservation, as in the case of the Cartagena Protocol of the CBD (UN, 2000). 1.3 The CBD and agriculture In large parts of Europe much of the conservation effort is concentrated on seminatural habitats, particularly farmland, which forms the largest element of the land area. This is in contrast to many other parts of the world (eg USA, Australia, New Zealand) where more effort is directed at restoring and protecting pristine wilderness (Sutherland, 2004). In consequence, the links between biodiversity and agricultural practice are extremely close in Europe. Agricultural biodiversity, as defined by CBD COP decision III/11 (UN, 1996) is a broad term that includes all components of biological diversity of relevance to food and agriculture, and all components of biological diversity that constitute the agroecosystem: the variety and variability of animals, plants and micro-organisms, at the 5

6 genetic, species and ecosystem levels, which are necessary to sustain key functions of the agro-ecosystem, its structure and processes. The CBD COP has initiated work in a thematic programme on agricultural biodiversity, which reflects the significance of the issue. The programme is broad reaching, and its work includes: assessing the status and trends of the world's agricultural biodiversity, along with investigating local knowledge of its management; promoting adaptive-management practices, technologies, policies and incentives; investigating technical aspects of new technologies, such as Genetic Use of Restriction Technologies, and the potential implications of these technologies on agricultural biodiversity, biosecurity, farming, and economy; studying the impacts of trade liberalisation on agricultural biodiversity; identifying policy issues that governments can consider, along with ways and means to improve the capacity of stakeholders and promote the mainstreaming and integration of biodiversity in sectoral and cross-sectoral plans and programmes at all levels. Work in the programme is focused on four aspects: 1. Assessments: country-driven assessments of the status and trends of agricultural biodiversity. 2. Adaptive Management: identification and promotion of adaptive management practices, technologies and related policy and incentive measures. 3. Capacity Building: promoting the participation and strengthening capacities of farmers and other stakeholders in the sustainable management of agricultural biodiversity. 4. Mainstreaming: support to development and integration of strategies and policies for sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity. Impact of biodiversity on agriculture Box 2: Biodiversity and agriculture a symbiotic relationship? Biodiversity has enabled farming systems to evolve since agriculture was first developed some 12,000 years ago. Today, for example, it presents opportunities for natural control of pests and reduction of pesticide use, while maintaining high yields, and a large proportion of crops depend on insect pollinators for good yields. Landraces and wild species of animals and plants are the essential source of genetic variability for responding to biotic and abiotic stress through genetic adaptation. Soil biodiversity is responsible for nutrient circulation and fertility within agricultural ecosystems. Diversified agricultural production provides protection against uncertainties in the market, especially for small producers, and increases the opportunities to add value and exploit new markets. Farmers all over the world have also managed a variety of wild species and habitats which benefit the sustainability of both agricultural and natural ecosystems. Impacts of agriculture on biodiversity Different agricultural practices lead to diverse impacts upon biological diversity. These impacts occur at the ecosystem, species and genetic levels. 6

7 Unsustainable agricultural practices have caused negative impacts on global biodiversity, at all levels. Inappropriate reliance on monoculture, over-mechanisation, and misuse of agricultural chemicals diminish the diversity of fauna, flora and micro-organisms, including beneficial organisms. Expansion of agriculture to frontier areas, including forests, savannahs, wetlands, mountains, and arid lands, combined with overgrazing, and inadequate crop management and pest control strategies contribute to degradation of biological diversity, as well as to the loss of the cultural diversity of traditional communities. Certain agricultural practices have, however, also facilitated or even enhanced biodiversity, especially in more traditional systems. Agricultural ecosystems can provide habitats for plants, birds and other animals. Some agriculturalists have made strong efforts to preserve biological diversity that is important to agriculture, both in situ and ex situ and progress is being made in many regions in implementing more biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices. The agricultural biodiversity work programme also includes cross-cutting initiatives on sustainable use of pollinators and sustainable use of soil biodiversity. In a decision taken at the seventh meeting of the COP (2004), the COP requested that options be developed for a further cross-cutting initiative on biodiversity for food and nutrition (to be presented at the eighth COP meeting in 2006). This would be part of the existing programme of work on agricultural biodiversity, and would aim to strengthen existing initiatives on food and nutrition. More details on the Decisions of the COPs can be found in Annex 2. Although there are no specific CBD objectives relating to agricultural biodiversity, the application of agricultural practices that conserve biodiversity is vital if the 2010 goal is to be reached. CBD requirements for integration of biodiversity considerations into other sectoral strategies and provision of protection for habitats and species are certainly relevant to agricultural practice. The way in which these requirements have been incorporated into European laws is discussed below. 2 BIODIVERSITY POLICY IN THE EU This section sets out the background to biodiversity policy development in the EU, and discusses relevant developments such as the EC Biodiversity Strategy (CEC, 1998) and the Biodiversity Action Plans (CEC, 2001a & 2001b) that are of direct relevance to agriculture (Agriculture and Natural Resources). It also touches on biodiversity and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the review of the Strategy and Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) that is currently underway. 2.1 Background Prior to ratifying the CBD in 1993, the EU had two directives that related directly to preserving biodiversity. The birds Directive of 1979 (79/409/EEC) was adopted to protect Europe s birds and their habitats (CEC, 1979). Subsequently and in response to concerns over the continued decline in Europe s biodiversity, the 1992 habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) was adopted (CEC, 1992). This effectively extended EC nature conservation policy to all species and habitats considered to be of Community interest. Please refer to Annex 3 for a brief overview of these Directives. In addition to these two central Directives, EC biodiversity legislation also encompasses measures concerned with genetically modified organisms, trade in 7

8 endangered species and Community programmes on the conservation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture. Recognising the importance of integrating environmental considerations within other sectoral activities, in line with Article 6 of the EC Treaty, the EC also pursues biodiversity conservation through adaptation of its policies in the area of agriculture and fisheries, international trade and development, and other sectors. Outside of these Directives, Community environmental policy is developed in the framework of multi-annual Environmental Action Programmes (EAPs). The fifth EAP (CEC, 1993) set a general objective of maintenance of the basic natural processes indispensable for the sustainable agricultural sector by conservation of water, soil and genetic resources, the management of the rural environment permitting the maintenance of biodiversity and natural habitats, and for covering all rural areas in (environmental) danger by management plans. The fifth EAP also called for action to protect all endangered domestic animal races, and set a target of covering 15 percent of the total agricultural area in the EU with management contracts under the agri-environment schemes 1 forming part of the CAP. This target was met by 1998 and no further area target was set in the sixth EAP (CEC, 2002) or following strategic documents, although increase of both area covered and resources dedicated is stated as a strategic objective of the 2003 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The sixth EAP was agreed in 2002 and will run until It lays down specific priority actions, including preventing and controlling the spread of alien invasive species; integrating biodiversity into the Common Fisheries and Agricultural Policies; and full implementation of the Cartagena Protocol. One of the objectives of the sixth EAP is to protect and where necessary restore the structure of functioning of natural systems and to halt the loss of biodiversity, although without a particular reference to agriculture. The Programme is binding on Member States, as it was adopted by the Parliament and the Council as a decision (CEC, 2002). The EC has declared a goal of halting the loss of biodiversity by This objective was stipulated in January 2001 in the proposal for the 6th EAP. It was reinforced later in 2001 by the EU strategy for sustainable development (CEC, 2001d), proposed by the Commission and adopted by the Gothenburg Council in May This represents a more stringent target than that adopted by the parties to the CBD at the sixth COP (discussed above). The EU goal requires a complete halt to biodiversity loss, whereas the COP Decision commits Parties to achieve only a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss. Protection of biodiversity was made one of the objectives of the 2003 CAP reform and has been implemented through the introduction of cross compliance measures. 2.2 European Community Biodiversity Strategy 1 Support under this measure is granted to farmers who commit themselves for a period of at least five years to use agricultural production methods designed to protect the environment or maintain the landscape. Farmers are compensated for additional cost incurred and incomes forgone as a result of adopting such production methods, in some cases an element of incentive is included in the payments. 8

9 The Biodiversity Strategy is the Community s contribution to meeting its commitments under the CBD in the same way that Member States have produced national biodiversity strategies and action plans. The Commission initiated the process by adopting a Communication to the Council and the Parliament on a European Community Biodiversity Strategy in February The Council and the Parliament have both endorsed the Strategy. The aim of the Strategy is to anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity at the source. This should help both to reverse present trends in biodiversity reduction or losses and to place species and ecosystems, which includes agro-ecosystems, at a satisfactory conservation status, both within and beyond the territory of the Union. The Strategy defines a framework for addressing the wide range of issues associated with key EC policies, based on a two-step process: step one involved adopting the strategy and its general policy orientations; and step two was the adoption of a series of sectoral Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) and other measures by the Commission. For the agricultural sector, the Strategy defines a large number of objectives and instruments (see Box 3). It acknowledges the role of farming communities as contributors to nature conservation, and calls for two approaches when aiming at the conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity: the conservation and sustainable use (both in- and ex situ) of the genetic resources of species, varieties, domestic animal breeds and microbial lifeforms with actual or potential value as agricultural commodities and the equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture; and the conservation and sustainable use of agro-ecosystems and their interface with other ecosystems. Box 3: Agricultural objectives in the EC Biodiversity Strategy Conservation and sustainable utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture: To formulate policy measures, programmes and projects which promote the implementation of the Global Plan of Action for the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture; To promote the development of technologies assessing levels of diversity in genetic resources; To reinforce the policy of conservation in situ and ex situ - of genetic resources of actual and potential value for food and agriculture; To promote the development of adequate gene-banks useful for the conservation in situ and ex situ of genetic resources for food and agriculture so that they will be available for use; and To endeavour to ensure that legislation does not obstruct the conservation of genetic resources. Conservation and sustainable use of agro-ecosystems and their interface with other ecosystems: To encourage the ecological function of rural areas; To integrate biodiversity objectives into the relevant instruments of the CAP; To promote farming methods enhancing biodiversity, by linking agricultural support to environmental conditions where appropriate; To promote good agricultural practice standards with a view to reducing the risk of pollution and of further damage to biodiversity; To increase awareness among all producers of the polluting potential of specific agricultural practices both short and long term and the need for all producers to be protectors of both 9

10 environment and biodiversity. This includes the development of an integrated strategy for the sustainable use of pesticides; To promote and ensure the viability of those crop species and varieties and domestic animal races which have to be farmed to conserve the ecosystems of priority wild species; To promote and support low-intensive agricultural systems especially in high nature values areas; and To further develop the agri-environment measures to optimise benefits on biodiversity by: 1. reinforcing targeted agri-environment measures; 2. assessing its performance against a set of biodiversity indicators; and 3. increasing the relevant budget and resources, as proposed in Agenda The impact of trade policies on agricultural commodity production and land use: To promote trade related agricultural policies and disciplines, which respect the needs for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity as well as principles of the World Trade Organisation. In addition to the specifically agricultural objectives, the objectives specified in the Strategy under the heading of conservation of natural resources outside protected areas are very relevant to agriculture : to develop in cooperation with Member States instruments to enhance the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity across the territory outside the protected areas; to use the Water Framework Directive as a tool for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and in this context to develop analyses of water quantity and quality versus demand for every river basin including agricultural irrigation, energy generation, industrial, drinking and ecological uses; to enhance the ecological function of land cover, including riparian and alluvial vegetation, to combat erosion and maintain the water cycle supporting ecosystems and habitats important for biodiversity; and to protect wetlands within the Community and restore the ecological character of degraded wetlands. The Strategy also sets objectives related to other global aspects of environmental protection, namely: to promote better coordination between different initiatives in the international fora in the field of climate change, ozone layer depletion and desertification to avoid duplication of efforts, in particular with respect to reporting procedures; and to identify interactions between the CBD and activities under other existing international agreements in order to optimise the opportunities for synergy. The Strategy is not binding on Member States as it does not have legislative status, and was simply a Commission communication. The Council adopted conclusions relating to the Strategy, and the Parliament also considered it, but it was never adopted as a Council s decision so remains a 'soft' Commission document (CEC, 1998). 2.3 Biodiversity Action Plans 10

11 Four sectoral BAPs were prepared and adopted by the Commission in March 2001, and were subsequently endorsed by the Council and the Parliament. The sectors covered were: agriculture; nature conservation; fisheries; and economic cooperation and development. Each BAP outlines the biodiversity issues associated with the policy area, relevant objectives for the sector and measures for delivery on these. None of the BAPs contain actual legislative proposals, instead they propose a list of future initiatives, including legislation, research, monitoring and indicators. The BAPs were accompanied by a chapeau which addressed cross-cutting issues, including indicators and other information on biodiversity activities. Details of the BAPs on Agriculture and Natural Resources are discussed below. Box 4: The EC Biodiversity Action Plans and Chapeau Chapeau addresses cross-cutting issues such as indicators (subsequently agreed in 2003), information on biodiversity activities (such as the EC s Clearing House Mechanism) and general research needs. The Chapeau also outlines coordination mechanisms to ensure appropriate follow-up by the Commission services, and to ensure complementarity with efforts at national and regional levels. Agriculture identifies seven priorities for future action in the area of agricultural policy, including ensuring more reasonable and rational agricultural practices, maintaining economically viable and socially acceptable agricultural activity, and exploring the potential of agri-environment incentives to deliver conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Within the framework of these priorities, the BAP identifies several core instruments to support the delivery of biodiversity objectives within the CAP, particularly in the measures introduced by Agenda Natural Resources aims to maximise the potential of existing and proposed environmental legislation in the EU, in so far as it contributes to achieving the goals of the EC Biodiversity Strategy. The preservation of important species and habitats is a particular concern. A key element of this BAP is to fully implement the birds and habitats Directives. This includes provision of financial and technical support for conservation outside designated areas, and focuses on measures to enhance opportunities and synergies within relevant international agreements and processes, to maximize benefits for biodiversity. BAPs were also produced on fisheries and economic cooperation and development Biodiversity Action Plan for Agriculture The BAP for Agriculture is intended to work alongside other measures under the EC Biodiversity Strategy, and also to complement and strengthen environmental measures in the CAP. It points out that because of the degree of human management of agricultural biodiversity, its conservation in production systems is linked to sustainable use. Sustainable agriculture means that farming systems must remain productive from the biological, economic and social perspectives, not just ecologically. Box 5: Main agricultural practices that impact on biodiversity unsustainable use of fertilisers and plant protection products; traditional practices giving way to more mechanisation; specialisation of production systems and intensification of certain practices (abandonment of mixed cropping systems and of cereals growing in grazing systems); reduction in number of species and varieties used; conversion of natural ecosystems to agriculture as well as abandonment of farm land; 11

12 re-parcelling (larger parcel size, disappearance of field margins: hedges, ditches, etc); and drainage and irrigation (especially when dimensions are not adapted to conditions ie overexploiting ground waters, or rivers). These can result in: degradation of site conditions, in particular soil degradation and erosion (affecting soil fauna); simplification and homogenisation of ecosystems; and uncontrolled spread of alien and wild species. In some areas cessation of certain agricultural practices is as much a threat to seminatural ecosystems as the intensification of productions. The abandonment of species rich grassland depending on grazing for its management is a clear example. Although alternative management can be a good solution in cases where farmers can no longer manage land, in most cases farmers do remain the logical land managers. Agrienvironment measures include the introduction of organic farming, extensive management of grassland, integrated crop management, set-aside of field margins and specific measures aimed at particular habitats. Measures are also in place to manage farm woodlands, wetlands and hedgerows in order to benefit flora and fauna. By the year 2000 well above 20 per cent of agricultural land was covered by agrienvironmental management contracts in the EU-15. The priorities in the BAP for Agriculture reflect those that were outlined in the Commission Communication Directions towards Sustainable Agriculture (CEC, 1999), and reflected in varying degrees by EU policy, including the final decisions on Agenda They include: ensuring the development of current intensive farming practices towards the achievement of a reasonable or rational degree of intensification; maintaining an economically viable and socially acceptable agricultural activity; using the potential of agri-environmental measures for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity; ensuring an ecological infrastructure exists throughout the EU, using Natura 2000 and the maintenance of linear features (eg hedgerows, field margins, watercourses); supporting scientific measures related to the use of genetic resources, including maintenance of traditional and rustic breeds and varieties; and implementing measures to prevent the spread of invasive species introduced and favoured by agriculture. A complete list of the priorities and targets set out in the BAP is given in Annex 4. Although several precise policy measures are prescribed in the BAP, and numerous indicators that should allow the assessment of progress were listed, no tangible area, habitats or species-related targets are set. The BAP for Agriculture concentrates on reviewing and improving the effectiveness of the existing EU measures and the development of performance indicators. In this respect it is not particularly adventurous. It, and the other BAPs are currently under review (see discussion below). 12

13 2.3.2 Biodiversity Action Plan for Natural Resources The BAP for Natural Resources focuses on wild plant and animal species and their related ecosystems and habitats. It contains a number of environmental quality targets and sets out specific actions to fulfil these objectives. Although the stated topic of this BAP may not seem to be directly relevant to agriculture, there are a number of sections of the BAP that do have a direct link to farming practice. There are specific actions in the BAP relating to the Rural and Regional Development Regulations. These include evaluation of the impact on biodiversity of Structural Fund Programmes and Rural Development Plans for as well as other Community financial instruments and monitoring the execution of these plans in the Member States ; and promoting the integration of biodiversity supporting measures into programming documents under the Rural, Structural and Cohesion Funds and other programmes relevant for third countries. There are also objectives relating to the Water Framework Directive (CEC, 2000a). The BAP discusses the ecosystem approach embodied in the Directive, and sets out actions to protect water quality, including through protection of soil quality, restoration and protection of wetlands and sound use of pesticides. The BAP envisages an enhanced contribution by the Structural Funds towards the preservation of biodiversity, and no net damage to biodiversity (including Natura and protected species) by plans and programmes involving Community funds. It discusses environmental liability regimes, environmental assessments, and application of the precautionary principle (in particular risk assessment and management addressing biodiversity issues) in the development and implementation of Community instruments. Also included in this BAP is a discussion of eco-labelling and forest certification, along with other economic incentives such as eco-audits. It touches on invasive species and genetically modified organisms (and micro-organisms), with a goal of preventing any adverse effects on biodiversity from the release of such organisms. Finally the interactions between biodiversity goals and other international conventions are discussed. 2.4 Review of EC Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans The European Commission is currently reviewing the EC Biodiversity Strategy and its four BAPs. A key milestone in this review was the May 2004 Malahide 2 Natura 2000 is a coherent-european ecological network of sites of Community importance, comprising of three types of sites: sites hosting the habitat types of Community importance listed in Annex I of habitat Directive, sites comprising the habitats of certain animal and plant species of Community importance listed in Annex II to habitat Directive, and Special Protection Areas for birds classified by Member States under the birds Directive. The purpose of the network is to enable the maintenance or restoration of a favourable conservation status in their natural range for the habitats concerned. 13

14 Conference, resulting in the Message from Malahide 3 with input from the Member States and various stakeholders. The Message gives directions for action to protect biodiversity in order to meet the EU s 2010 target of halting biodiversity loss. All actions are to be completed by 2010 or earlier. The Message contains a number of objectives with a direct link to agricultural practice. These include time-bound goals relating to establishment of the Natura 2000 network, economic development and international trade. The key Malahide objective for agriculture is Objective 5 which is set out in Box 6. Box 6: Objective 5 Message from Malahide OBJECTIVE 5: To further integrate biodiversity issues into the Common Agricultural Policy in order that the agricultural sector can fulfil its contribution to the 2010 biodiversity target 2010 and earlier targets Within the Rural Development context 5.1 The Rural Development Regulation strengthened within the Financial Perspectives including its funding and in particular those measures including Less Favoured Areas and areas with environmental restrictions and agri-environment that contribute to the delivery of biodiversity. 5.2 High Nature Value areas (including the Natura 2000 network) threatened with loss of biodiversity and abandonment identified, and measures to address those threats provided. 5.3 Habitats and species in other agricultural areas also at risk of biodiversity loss identified and support for their protection provided. 5.4 High-Nature Value areas and traditional farming systems included in Less Favoured Areas and their continued support provided for. 5.5 Rural Development support underpinned by identified Good Farming Practices that provide a basic level of protection for biodiversity. 5.6 Agri-environmental schemes in addition to their other tasks specifically targeted to provide positive incentives for biodiversity conservation in the longer-term; 5.7 Extension services and farm advisory system broadened, and biodiversity training for farmers, land owners and farm workers strengthened. Within the market pillar 5.8 Provisions of the 2003 CAP reform (eg. decoupling, national envelope, Single Farm Payment) implemented in such a way as to benefit biodiversity. 5.9 Cross-compliance effectively implemented in ways that benefit biodiversity, including possible extension of scope following its evaluation in Genetic resources 5.10 Measures in place to ensure the conservation and availability for use of genetic resources, and in situ conservation (varieties, breeds and races) promoted. Monitoring and evaluation 5.11 Effectiveness of rural development and key market policy reform measures (single farm payment, cross-compliance, national envelopes etc) for biodiversity monitored and evaluated. In June 2004, the Council responded to the Message from Malahide (CEC, 2004a) by asking the Commission to submit a report by early 2005 on its assessment of the implementation, effectiveness and appropriateness of each of the objectives and targets set in the European Community Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans taking into account the consultative process now concluded and, notably, the Message from Malahide. The Commission has indicated that a Communication is under preparation setting out a roadmap to It will also revisit the activities and actions proposed in the BAPs, and will possibly look at appropriate instruments to achieve the 2010 target. The

15 timing of the Communication has been delayed, and is now likely to be ready in November The draft Communication will initially be discussed in the Commission s Biodiversity Expert Group before being presented to the Council. 2.5 Biodiversity in the Common Agricultural Policy There are a number of CAP provisions that may be used for both basic protection and active enhancement of biodiversity on farmland. The cross-compliance requirements that come into force in January 2005 cover a set of minimum requirements related to biodiversity on all agricultural land subject to direct payments (CEC, 2003). In 1992, rural development policy introduced very clear provisions for proactive promotion of biodiversity, as a part of MacSharry s CAP reform. The most important of these provisions was the compulsory use of the agrienvironment measures by all Member States. Other measures of relevance mainly brought forward from previous policy included compensatory allowances under Less Favoured Areas schemes, as well as some investment, marketing and training provisions. Biodiversity conservation is one of the principal environmental objectives which can be advanced by the use of incentive schemes such as agri-environment schemes, focused either on nature conservation specifically or on other goals, such as reduced water pollution or conversion to organic farming. Initiatives to market the products of high nature value farming systems at a premium price can provide an economic incentive to farmers for maintaining wildlife friendly management methods. Some of the traditional products covered by the EU system of geographic denominations of origin fall into this category. For more details please refer to the MEACAP report: Recent evolution of the EU CAP: state of play and environmental potential Common Agricultural Policy which is available on the project website An additional set of measures focused on genetic resources for agricultural production is available under the Community programmes on the conservation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture (CEC, 2004b), see Box 7. Box 7: Community programme on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture The programme was adopted (Council Regulation (EC) 870/2004) in April 2004 for the years , with a budget of EUR 10 million. The aim of the new programme is: to help ensure and improve the conservation, characterisation, evaluation, collection, documentation, development and utilisation of plant, animal and microbial genetic resources which are or could be of use in the widest sense in agriculture in the Community; to complement and promote at Community level the work undertaken in the Member States for the conservation, characterisation, evaluation, collection, documentation, development and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture; and to bring more co-ordination and harmonization of existing actions in the Member States with a view to reinforcing the Community's efforts in conserving and documenting plant, animal and microbial genetic resources and eliminating duplication of effort. 15

16 The programme is also meant to complement the scope (as regards beneficiaries and/or eligible actions for funding) of other EU funded activities, ie agri-environment programmes, and activities supported under the European Union Framework Programmes of Research and Technological Development. One of the objectives of this programme is to facilitate co-ordination in the field of international undertakings on genetic resources in agriculture, in particular within the Convention on Biological Diversity, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and the FAO's Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Utilisation of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture The actions that can be approved under the programme (by the Commission, assisted by the Committee on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic agricultural resources) fall into three categories: Targeted actions covering activities aimed at ex situ, in situ and on farm conservation, characterisation, evaluation, collection, documentation, development of utilisation of genetic resources; eg. establishing national inventories, web-based European networks, data bases etc., promotion of dissemination of existing knowledge, and exchange; Concerted actions to improve co-ordination at the Community level (eg. seminars, reports, coordination of activities at the technical level); and Accompanying actions such as seminars, conferences, workshops, training for specialists, technical reports, promotion of the commercial use of results. 2.6 National biodiversity strategies and action plans The sectoral approach of the EC BAPs contrasts with the more general approach taken by the Member States in development of their national biodiversity strategies under the CBD. These tend to focus on habitat or species types rather than sectoral issues. Most national strategies do not go into detail over issues such as agriculture, fisheries and natural resources (see Reed and Moss 2001). The EC and national strategies diverge to some degree, as although they are based on the same 1992 CBD documents, they reflect the evolution of thinking over the period. In addition, some national strategies were published earlier than the key EU policy developments, and do not take them into account. In order to ensure that the national and EC efforts complement, rather than contradict, each other, a Biodiversity Expert Group has been set up. Its purpose is to promote effective communication and coordination between actions taken at Community and Member State levels. It also provides a forum for reviewing progress under the four BAPs. Detailed information about individual Member States implementation of the CBD can be obtained at: Monitoring and evaluation One of the major issues related to assessing the effectiveness of existing policy instruments to deliver on the biodiversity-related objectives of the BAPs is the effectiveness of the existing monitoring and evaluation tools. Major improvements in monitoring and evaluation are needed before a reliable and consistent body of scientific evidence becomes available across the EU. Significant progress has been 16

17 made already in developing agri-environment indicators at the EU, international and national level, but the spatial character of biodiversity and complexity of population dynamics represent difficult challenges. Internationally, OECD has played a major role in methodological discussions on environmental indicators and in the more practical work of actually identifying and interpreting agri-environmental indicator trends. Within the EU, substantial efforts have been made to develop agri-environmental indicators and put them to use, specifically in a report prepared in collaboration between Eurostat, Directorate General (DG) Agriculture and DG Environment in 1999 and in the recent communications on agri-environmental indicators (CEC 2000b & 2001e). Agrienvironment issues were also included in the Dobris assessment (EEA, 1995) from the European Environment Agency (EEA) as early as 1995 and have continued to play a major role in reporting and monitoring in the EU. Wascher (ed.), 2000 gives an overview of the development of agri-environmental indicators in Europe. More indepth discussions on the development and functions of agri-environmental indicators can be found in Brouwer and Crabtree, Cooperation between the European Commission s DG Agriculture, DG Environment, DG Eurostat, DG Joint Research Centre and the EEA has led to the development of a new set of agri-environment indicators (including biodiversity indicators). The programme of activities undertaken by this group of organisations has been called the IRENA Operation (Indicator Reporting on the Integration of Environmental Concerns into Agricultural Policy) 4 and has been managed and co-ordinated by the EEA. 3. OBLIGATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL POLICY UNDER THE CBD As noted earlier, the CBD applies to biodiversity as a whole and does not include obligations which apply specifically or solely to the agricultural sector. However, some of the decisions taken by the Conference of the Parties do refer explicitly to agriculture, expanding on the broad principles in the Convention. The CBD does refer specifically to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and its Cartagena Protocol lays down a system for dealing with GMOs at the international level. However, it is not the intention of this project to devote significant attention to the issue of GMOs, which are the subject of several important items of Community legislation which do not fall within the CAP. The extent to which the CBD creates concrete obligations for the agricultural sector and the CAP is open to some discussion. The CBD itself establishes a range of relatively broad obligations, such as the requirement to establish protected areas, to develop national strategies and to integrate biodiversity objectives into sectoral plans, programmes and policies. The European Commission s response was set out in the EC Biodiversity Strategy in This does refer explicitly to agro-biodiversity, proposing two parallel approaches, one on the conservation and sustainable use of genetic resources used within agriculture and the other on the conservation and sustainable use of agro-ecosystems. Various aims are elaborated under both broad themes

18 Following from this strategy are the Community s Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs). These need to be seen as a group, with the BAPs for natural resources and agriculture being particularly significant for agriculture in the Community. The agriculture BAP was launched in 2002 and is closely tied to the policy instruments within the CAP as it then stood. It has recently been reviewed and there is clearly scope for realigning it with current policy measures, including the Rural Development Regulation and cross compliance. A statement from the Commission on the review is likely to be issued in The Rural Development Regulation is being revised and will be replaced by a new European Agricultural fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). A separate but related strand of EU policy is the commitment in the Sustainable Development Strategy and the sixth EAP to halt biodiversity decline within the EU, with the aim of reaching this objective by This more concrete target does not flow directly from the EC Biodiversity Strategy but does appear binding on the EU institutions through virtue of its inclusion in the sixth EAP. It forms a more specific target to which the agriculture sector would need to contribute along with others and taking account of Member State as well as EU policy and activities. The EC s Biodiversity Strategy and the BAPs that followed were Commission documents only, and therefore their resolutions are not legally binding on the Member States. However, the sixth EAP was adopted via the co-decision process involving the Council and European Parliament, and therefore its contents are legally binding. Whilst more legal analysis is required, our initial view is that the MEACAP project will need to consider the measures required within the agricultural sector to meet the objectives set out in the EC Biodiversity Strategy and accompanying BAPs. The 2010 target date should be considered a further objective of direct relevance to agriculture, despite its different provenance in legal and policy terms. Having said this, it must be acknowledged that most of the obligations are couched in broad terms and considerable judgement will be required with respect to the acceptability of the EU response. Translating the 2010 target of halting the loss of biodiversity related to agricultural land into tangible goals would in principle involve identification of all species dependent on agricultural land that are subject to decline, as well as all agricultural habitats that are in need of protection. The Natura 2000 network is currently the primary means of achieving the objective, but the designation of the network is not complete and many sites still lack management plans and objectives. Accession of the 10 new member states, many of which contain considerable areas of high nature value, will add to the complexity of the task. Development of more tangible targets in terms of reducing or eliminating indirect negative effects of agricultural activity on biodiversity is another area of concern. It is partly addressed through the existing EU environmental legislation (such as the Nitrates Directive), with cross-compliance adding some impetus for enforcement, but many areas such as use of pesticides are not yet fully addressed. Development and future implementation of some of the thematic strategies under the sixth EAP will be of crucial importance, and water basin management plans under the Water Framework Directive have great potential for reducing agricultural pressures 18

19 on biodiversity. It will be essential to consider agricultural biodiversity in the process of developing implementation mechanisms for these new instruments. In attempting to gauge the results and the efficacy of the integration strategy within EU policy, including the CAP, or use of more specific measures such as agrienvironment schemes reference must be made to baseline data on the state of agricultural biodiversity in the EU. In many respects such data is still incomplete. Appropriate links between the EU s nature conservation policy instruments (eg Natura 2000 network), agricultural policy and funding instruments as a measure of effective delivery of biodiversity objectives are also essential. Initial steps have been taken at the EU level through introduction of cross-compliance, studies estimating the resources needed for management of Natura 2000 network (CEC, 2004c), and ongoing work on agri-environment indicators. The success of EU level initiatives and policy measures, both existing and new, relies heavily on the political will of Member States, the effectiveness of the cooperation between the EU institutions, national governments and other pan-european fora dealing with biodiversity on farmland. The same factors are also critical to the EU s commitment to meeting CBD objectives, and have the potential to help develop more clear objectives and targets for agriculture s contribution to biodiversity protection and enhancement. 19

20 4 REFERENCES Brouwer, F. & Crabtree, B. (ed.) (1999) Environmental indicators and agricultural policy. Wallingford, CAB International. CEC 1979, Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. OJ L 103, , Brussels CEC 1992, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora habitats. OJ L 206, , Brussels CEC 1993; "Towards Sustainability" the European Community Programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development (better known as The Fifth EC Environmental Action Programme) OJ C138, , Brussels CEC 1998 Communication of the European Commission to the Council and the Parliament on a European Community Biodiversity Strategy. COM (98)42, , Brussels CEC 1999, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament; the Economic and Social Committee and the Committte of the Regions: Directions towards Sustainable Agriculture. COM (1999) 22 final, , Brussels CEC 2000a, Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. OJ L 237 of 22/12/2000, Brussels CEC 2000b, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Indicators for the integration of environmental concerns into the common agricultural policy, COM (2000) 20 final, , Brussels. CEC 2001a, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Biodiversity Action Plan for Agriculture. COM (2001)0162 (III), Brussels. CEC, 2001b, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliamen: Biodiversity Action Plan for the Conservation of Natural Resources. COM (2001)0162 final (II), Brussels. CEC 2001d, Communication from the Commission: A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development. COM(2001)264 final, , Brussels CEC 2001e, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Statistical Information needed for Indicators to monitor the Integration of Environmental concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy COM(2001) 144 final, , Brussels. 20