Agriculture and Rural Development

Demonstrating compliance with article 46 of RDR for

investments in irrigation

Meeting of the Strategic Coordination Group for the WDF Common Implementation Strategy

(5 November 2014)

Christine FALTER, AGRI H1 DG Agriculture and Rural Development

European Commission

Demonstrating compliance with article 46 of RDR for investments in irrigation

• EAFRD support for irrigation – intention and legal basis• What is required in Rural Development Programmes

(RDPs)?• Clarification of specific issues

2

EAFRD support for irrigation – legal basis • Recital (35) RDR: "…EAFRD to support investments in irrigation to provide

economic and environmental benefits, provided that the sustainability of the irrigation concerned is ensured"

• Art. 46 RDR: sets out conditions for support• Measures for supporting investments in irrigation

• Sub-measure 4.1 Equipment located on the holding (Off-farm) "infrastructure" – to be used only for irrigation - not freely

available for use by anyone who might wish to have access to it• Sub-measure 4.3

(Off-farm) infrastructure – to be used only for irrigation - freely available for use by anyone who might wish to have access to it

• Sub-measure 7.2 Small-scale water infrastructure - used not only for irrigation but also for

other purposes.

3

Requirements of article 46 RDR

4

Two general basic conditions

River basin management plan

(RBMP)Water metering at level

of investment

2 scenarios with separate conditions

Improvement to irrigation equipment

already in place

Net increase of irrigated area

affecting given water body

1 2

Scenario 1 – Art. 46(4)

5

Improvement to equipment already in place

"Potential water saving" (efficiency gain) of at least 5 – 25 %, assessed ex ante

Does affected water body have a quantity-related problem (WFD framework)?

No actual reduction in water use required

Required actual reduction in water

use = 50 % of potential water

saving

No Yes

"Potential water saving"

Potential water saving = increase in water efficiency

"a reduction which, thanks to the investment, could now be made to the amount of water flowing through the equipment affected by the investment without having a negative impact on the crops to which the water is finally being provided."

(Presidency document of October 2012)

6

Example: potential water saving & effective reduction in water use

Investment in on-farm equipment• Farmer switching from basic sprinkler system to drip irrigation• 10 000 m3 to achieve certain yield• New system can achieve same yield with 8 000 m3• Potential water saving = 2 000 m3 (20 %)

• Status of water body is less than good• 50 % of potential water saving has to be converted into actual

reduction in water use• 50 % of 2000 m3 = 1 000 m3• Economic benefit for farmer + environmental benefit

7

Scenario 2 – Art. 46(5)

8

Net increase in irrigated areaaffecting given water body

Does affected water body have a quantity-related problem (WFD framework)?

+ environmental analysis required

Derogations apply?

Support not permitted

No Yes

No

Yes

Scenario 2 - derogationsNet increase in irrigated area drawing on water body with a scarcity problem is not permitted, except for some derogations…..

•Derogation 1 – linked investments• Water required comes from a water saving resulting from a linked

investment in existing irrigation equipment

•Derogation 2 - reservoir• Water needed supplied from reservoir approved before 31 October 2013• Reservoir is identified and monitored in line with the Water Framework

Directive• A limit on abstractions / minimum required flow was in in force on 31

October 2013• The investment in new irrigated area respects this limit

9

What is required in RDPs? • Sufficent detail on broad categories of investment (improvements in

existing equipment/ infrastructure, net extension to irrigated area, or both)

• Improvements to existing facilities: • Sufficient ambition concerning potential water savings: different minima,

OR single minimum (selection criteria granting extra points for projects offering higher potential savings)

• If water body with less-than-good status is affected: actual reduction in water use

• Net extension to irrigated areas: • Set out conditions of art. 46(5)• Identify if derogations of art. 46(6) apply• Intention to take into account area irrigated in "recent past" (art. 46(5))

when determining net increase?

10

Clarification of specific issues • Cases which are considered support in increase in irrigated area:

• "mixed projects": improvement of existing infrastructure combined with extension of infrastructure

• "transferring" burden of water abstractions from one water body to another)

• Formal status of a water body cannot change over the year (MS cannot consider "seasonal status")

• Effective reductions in water use • calculation of baseline: as a maximum an average calculated over 5 years

(in case of review of permit: revised maximum abstraction volume to be considered as baseline)

• calculation of actually achieved saving: a reduction every year is recommended

11

Thank you for your attention!