Microsoft Word - FORESCENE_Florence_Report_Part1

Summary report of the workshop on the Agriculture activity and policy field

Workshop “Development of core elements of integrated sustainability scenarios for agriculture (Goal definition & Pre-Backcasting)”

Florence 19-20 October 2006

PART 1: SUMMARY REPORT

February 2007

Agriculture and Land Resources Department of the University of Florence Leonardo Casini

Ginevra V. Lombardi Valerio Lucchesi

FORESCENE Workshop Summary „Agriculture““

2

Table of Content

1 INTRODUCTION 3

2 DEVELOPMENT OF CORE ELEMENTS OF AGRICULTURAL INTEGRATED SUSTAINABILITY SCENARIOS 4

2.1 Visions for desired long-term scenarios of sustainability for agriculture 5

2.2 Visions for realistic long-term scenarios of sustainability for agriculture 6

2.3 The sustainability scenario elements 10

2.4 Main political tools in relation to the desired long term scenario 12

2.5 Main cross cutting drivers 14

3 THE INTERACTIVE PAPER BOARD EXERCISE 16

4 SYNTHESIS 18

ANNEX 1 21


3

1 Introduction

The workshop “Development of core elements of integrated sustainability scenarios for agriculture

(Goal definition & Pre-Backcasting)” held in Florence is part of Workpackage 2 of the FORESCENE project. During a previous stage of the project, the environmental issues such as water, biodiversity/soil/landscape, and resources/waste were selected and defined, to be further analyzed in this project.

The workshops organized in the framework of the Workpackage 2 shifted the perspective from the

problem-oriented topics towards activity fields (sectors, policy fields). The Florence workshop together with other two workshops organized in parallel by the other partners of the project, focused on agricultural policies and activity field.

During the workshop, the invited experts were asked to define the essential elements of

sustainable development in agriculture in a positive manner, i.e. not only in the sense of avoiding and mitigating current problems but also through answering, what the desired future should look like, which prerequisites are deemed essential for sustainability and which political tools would be more suitable.

In order to be as effective as possible in regards with the aims of the workshop some key guiding questions were elaborated, such as:

1. How could a desired long-term vision of sustainability for the activity/policy field “Agriculture” looks like, considering essential the environmental, economic and social

development?

2. Which are the essential elements of sustainability that, as integral part of the vision, can be defined for the purpose of developing sustainability scenarios?

3. Which are the requirements and potential measures that can be described as deemed

promising to reach the defined sustainability scenario?

4. Which are the measures able to address activities or driving forces that show cross-sectoral impact and hence are potentially able to have a multi-beneficial effect without shifting the problems?

The outcome of the workshop will be summarized in this paper, trying to highlight the main targets, the main sustainability scenario elements and the key policy measures to reach the envisioned future.


4

2 Development of core elements of agricultural integrated sustainability scenarios

In order to answer to the key-questions of the workshop the participants have been requested to fill a questionnaire (Annex 1) structured in the following sections:

- Desired long-term vision of sustainability for agriculture;

- Realistic short term scenario for agriculture;

- Sustainability scenario elements (SSEs);

- Main political tools in relation to the desired long term scenario;

- Main cross cutting drivers.

The following experts involved, answered reflecting their “expert knowledge”:

Expert Institute (Country) Expertise

Piorr, Annette ZALF (DE) Impact assessment, Indicators, Organic farming

Frangenberg, Andreas EISA (EU) Agriculture, Environment

Traversac, Jean Baptiste INRA (FR) Agricultural Economics

Hurrelmann, Annette CE DGAgri (EU) Agricultural Policy analysis

Sieber, Stefan ZALF (DE) Agricultural Economics,

Environmental resources economics

Bardaji, Isabel Uni Madrid (ES) Agricultural Policy

Svensson, Mats LUCSUS (SE) Agriculture, Water, System

analysis

Frances Tudel, Gemma University of Barcelona (ES)

Diversification Strategies, Multifunctionality

Pacini, Cesare University of Florence (IT) Sustainability Modelling

Boscaleri, Fabio Regione Toscana (IT) GMOs, Forestry

Trisorio, Antonella INEA (IT) Agri-sustainability indicators, rural development

Viaggi, Davide University of Bologna (IT) Agricultural Economics, Environment

Casini, Leonardo DEART (IT) Agricultural economics

Edoardo, Pizzoli FAO Economics, statistics


5

2.1 Visions for desired long-term scenarios of sustainability for agriculture

The first key-question of the workshop was: “How could a desired long-term vision of sustainability for agriculture looks like, considering the environmental, economic and social elements of sustainable development?”

The analysis of the results of the questionnaire allows us determine the long term scenarios, which

appear as the most desired by the participants to the workshop, i.e. seen by the experts as eligible characteristics of the given scenario to increase in the future 10-15 years. In graph 1 the “Desired long term vision scenarios” and “The main sector” of agriculture involved in a vision of sustainability, are shown according to the importance as “increasing” scenarios/sectors.

There is a common congruence that the scenario “Integration with industrial and tourist activities” is the most desired one (Graph 1). “Green high-tech agriculture” and “Large scale farms” represent the other two “key” components of the envisioned scenario for the majority of the experts.

Moreover, both “Extensive” and “Organic agriculture” are considered desirable solutions for the

future by a large part of the interviewees. On the contrary, “Marginal agricultural areas”, is not estimated as crucial in this long-term vision.

The “Small scale farms” and “Intensive agriculture” are seen to be destined for a progressive re-organization, with a few exceptions by the experts from Germany.

Concerning the main sectors, “Renewable energy crop production” and “Environmental services”, they resulted to be the most desired ones and as those to expand in the future, followed by “Agro-tourism”, “Production of biomass” and “Provision of social services”. The “Meat” and “Milk” sectors are the most declining ones in the future scenario, while “Cereals” and “Oilseed” production are

stable.

Graph 1


6

The answers given turned out to be coherent with the expectations of the largest part of the European society on agriculture. They highlight as desired agricultural outputs products of high

social value: renewable energetic alternatives and environmental services but not the traditional products. The questions regarding the economic sustainability of these new products are not explicitly and intentionally considered, but the opportunity of a productive re-organization (Large scale farms and Green high tech) is been pointed out, in order to reach sufficient competitiveness

of the sector. Finally, it is been seen as an important indication for an integration of other economic activities, with tourism above all, into the agricultural sector. This prospect appears to be a winning strategy, at least a desirable one , in order to achieve not only an environmental sustainable rural development, but also an economic and a social one. These directions are shareable, but at the

present phase the appropriateness of this scenario has not been taken into account.

2.2 Visions for realistic long-term scenarios of sustainability for agriculture

In order to make the experts better understand the objectives stated in the following part of the questionnaire, they were also requested to provide their opinion on the realistic short-term

scenarios for agriculture. In particular, the experts were questioned about realistic scenarios that can be foreseen as of increasing importance in the short term.

Comparing the desired long term scenarios and the realistic short-term scenarios, some different results appear, even if similar trends can be noted in the expert’s choices.

The “Large scale farm” scenario resulted as the most probable one followed by the “Integration with industrial and tourist activities”. It confirms in the results of the desired scenario, thus highlighting a strong coherence between the expectations on agriculture and its possible evolution caused by the current trends. “Extensive agriculture” is to be growing, but at the same time, there

is a positive trend for “Intensive agriculture” too. The latter is realistically going to increase in the short term, although it is not seen to be a desirable solution for a future long-term scenario.

Another two increasing scenarios seem to be the “Organic agriculture” and the “Green high tech agriculture”.

According to the most of the experts, the “Small farm agriculture” is realistically going to decrease and, with even more congruency among the participants, also the “Marginal agricultural areas”.

“Biomass” and “Renewable energy crop production” are the most probable increasing main sectors in the short term, as well as the “Provision of environmental services”.

On the other side, “Milk” and “Cereals” are unquestionably considered as decreasing, while “Social services” is stable.

In the following graph ( Graph 2) the realistic short term vision scenarios and the main sector are shown according to the importance as “increasing” scenarios/sectors.


7

Graph 2

Generally speaking, it seems that nowadays agriculture is trying to give answers to the new needs of society. These needs which are not only represented by food products, but that also consider the multifunctional role played by agriculture itself, such as farm tourism and renewable energies.

In order to better understand the results of the questionnaire, it seems appropriate to analyse the

contributions of the different experts, in terms of sustainable scenarios and desirable agricultural outputs.

Annette Piorr showed the results of the European project MEA-SCOPE. From a condensed list of Non Commoditiy Outputs (NCO)1 stakeholders (in total n= 50) chose the highlighted NCOs as

those, which are regarded as the most relevant to be delivered by agriculture in terms of current and future sustainable development in their regions (cross-country comparison result)” (Schader et al 2007):

– Provision of jobs;

– Stimulation of small businesses;

– Prevention of migration of young people;

– Regional tourism;

– Rural livelihood;

– Regional food supply;

– Regional food processing;

– Production of safe food;

– Stimulation of rural cultural activities;

1 In this paper the terms NCOs, externalities and non market products are considered as synonymous, for a more detailed discussion of the meanings (Multifunctionality towards an analytical framework., OCSE, 2001)


8

– Recreation in rural areas;

– Keeping traditional socio-cultural identity;

– Increased biodiversity;

– Animal welfare;

– Keeping the cultural landscape;

– Soil fertility;

– Hydroecological equilibrium.

Davide Viaggi in figure 1 summarizes the outcome of a survey at the European level on the relevance in the rural development programs of different Agricultural Environmental Products (AEP) objectives.

Figure 1 – Weight of AEP objectives in a set of regions in the EU

The figure shows the different profile of the importance of the AEP in the European regions,

through the analysis of the budgets assigned to each AEP measure in the rural development programs. Notwithstanding these differences it is possible to highlight some common evaluation: there is a prevalence of measures for “Soil and water conservation” and for “Landscape” and a lower importance is attributed to “Genetic Biodiversity” in its different forms.

0,0000

0,0500

0,1000

0,1500

0,2000

0,2500

0,3000

0,3500

0,4000

Soil

Water Quality

Water Quantity

Fauna and FloraHabitat

Genetic Biodiversity

Landscape

IT-er

IT-VE

UK

IR

BE

CZ

D

FR

NL

Fi


9

Another point of view is well illustrated by the paper of Gemma Francès y Tudel: “In areas where there are no alternative jobs, the evolution of population depends on the maintenance of

agriculture. There are many different reasons to maintain rural society and the agrarian activity. Among those, the paper emphasizes the following:

− Maintenance of the cultural identity of rural populations; − Soil conservation against erosion;

− Landscape maintenance; − To stop congestion of urban nuclei; − To safeguard a critical population mass that permits to maintain local public services.

Hence, the positive social externalities of productive systems make reference to the capacity to

maintain population in the territory and, as a consequence, the capacity of job creation and the pulling effect on the rural economy. … In Spain, “Multifunctionality is the framework to find solutions for agrarian less favoured areas, for areas with high risk of depopulation and for fragile ecosystems”.

Stefan Sieber presented the results of the European project Sensor. With regard to agricultural and rural policy perspective the most important elements to be considered in a vision on sustainability scenarios are the following highlighted issues:

Social dimension:

SOC1: Employment and labour markets

SOC2: Standards and rights related to job quality

SOC3: Social inclusion and protection of particular groups

SOC4: Equality of treatment and opportunities, non-discrimination

SOC5: Private and family life, personal data

SOC6: Governance, participation, good administration, access to justice, media and ethics

SOC7: Public health and safety

SOC8: Crime, terrorism and security

SOC9: Access to and effects on social protection, health and educational systems.

SOC10: Tourism pressure

SOC11: Landscape identity

SOC12: Migration

Environmental dimension:

ENV1: Air quality

ENV2: Water quality and resources

ENV3: Soil quality and resources

ENV4: The climate

ENV5: Renewable or non-renewable resources

ENV6: Biodiversity, flora, fauna and landscapes

ENV7: Land use

ENV8: Waste production / generation / recycling

ENV9: The likelihood or scale of environmental risks

ENV10: Mobility (transport modes) and the use of energy

ENV11:The environmental consequences of firms’ activities

ENV12: Animal and plant health, food and feed safety


10

Economic dimension:

ECO1: Competitiveness, trade and investment flows

ECO2: Competition in the internal market

ECO3: Operating costs and conduct of business

ECO4: Administrative costs on business

ECO5: Property rights

ECO6: Innovation and research

ECO7: Consumers and households

ECO8: Specific regions or sectors

ECO9: Third countries and international relations

ECO10: Public authorities

ECO11: The macroeconomic environment

Source: SENSOR 2006.

“A “desired” future scenario should emphasize on balancing the positive effects in the highlighted issues. This prioritisation of “sustainability issues” is a commitment; however SENSOR

does not pre-define the “desired scenarios”, but simulates the discussed instruments in the current political debate. The current policy framework of the CAP provides a bunch of instruments to cause positive effects within the above described impact-issues.”

A diversified agriculture is the result of this potential scenario for a sustainable agriculture. In

relation to the specific territorial characteristics, it can be identified as intensive, organic or extensive, but, in any case, strictly and strongly integrated with the other activities carried out in the same territory, in particular with regard to tourism. At the same time is necessary to recognise the role of agriculture in the production of positive externalities, especially from an economic point of

view. It is an agriculture to which it is challenged to improve its competitiveness and environmental sustainability, and setting goals through a productive re-organization and the adoption of high level of technological innovation. This agriculture would not just aim to increase its productivity, but instead seek to minimize the external inputs and guarantee quality and food safety.

If this represents the new foreseen and desired equilibrium, the questions to be answered are how many of the existing farms will be able to achieve these goal and what are the new territorial arrangements that will have to take place, both in terms of new land use patterns and of farms organization.

The sustainability scenario elements

The second key-question of the workshop is: “Which essential elements of sustainability that are integral part of the vision can be defined for the purpose of developing sustainability scenarios?”

In the table below (Graph 3) presents sustainability scenario elements (SSEs) that are considered as of an increasing importance in the future by the experts.

“Water management”, “Quality food production” and “Rural livelihood” ordinally are seen as the most important and increasing elements to be taken into consideration for a future agricultural sustainability scenario, but also all the other functions reported in the graph are considered

substantially increasing in the future.


11

In contrast with this increasing social role of agriculture, the expectations in terms of jobs, production and Agricultural Used Area (AUA) do not seem to be so optimistic.

Let us analyse these three elements in terms of realistic predictions and desirable scenarios.

The evolution of employment in agriculture seems to be determined by the possibility of finding of an equilibrium between the competitiveness of the agricultural productions and the allocation of market and non market services to society. The scenarios previously examined show a more

extensive agriculture, instead of an intensive one, organized among a smaller number of farms and capable of keeping themselves on the market. Under this conditions, the hypothesis of a further reduction of the number of employees in agriculture seems to be highly probable. The only alternative appears to be the development of high quality products and services (farm tourism, etc.)

agricultures, which are vertically and horizontally integrated in the market and capable of maintaining prices with a high level of value added.

The scenario for the European agricultural productions is similarly difficult. In general, it seems difficult to keep the current levels of production in numerous sectors stable, while the international

market is every day more opened. Even so, the production of high quality and safety foods appears to be a convincing solution, in order to preserve the present levels of agricultural GDP at least in terms of value. And the role given to the energetic biomasses and to bio-diesel in the re-conversion of several sowable lands is, undoubtedly, very important.

In this context, the experts opinion is, that the Agricultural Used Area will be, in any case, destined to decrease, due both to the abandonment of many marginal areas for market and social reasons and to the abandonment of productive areas in regions of high urban pressures. Moreover, the re-organization process of the structures towards more competitive ones and/or towards new

products can lead the cessation of production of many hectares. The management and control of this phenomenon of contraction, represents one of the strategic keys for the future of European agriculture, in order to preserve it in the most difficult social and environmental areas.

Graph 3


12

2.4 Main political tools in relation to the desired long term scenario

The third key-question of the workshop was: “How can current policy objectives of topic complexes

be translated to match with the objectives sustainability scenario?” (Graph 4)

The experts participating the workshop have been asked to express their opinion about possible political measures to achieve the desired long term scenarios.

The crucial issues, which came out from the workshop and from the different papers can be

suitably synthesized by the question pointed out by the European Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel during the introduction of his speech “Promoting the Competitiveness of European Agriculture” at the Congress of European Farmers, held in Strasbourg last October: “Can a farmer be both a competitive producer of farm goods and also a good steward of the countryside, as the

public wants? Is there a contradiction?”. The question raised is, whether it will be possible at the same time to achieve a competitive, environmental and a social sustainable agricultural model as predominat in the European regions?

In the context of the Mea Scope project (Piorr et al.) this issue has been faced as follows,

integrating the aim of an environmental sustainability with that of multifunctionality:

“The long term vision of sustainable development is narrowly linked with the question of the future development of land use. On the European scale, this question is of particular interest for rural areas, where agriculture is the predominant type of land use”.

Multifunctionality is the key concept to enable agriculture to support sustainable development. It emphasizes the multiple functions and outputs of agriculture beyond the pure provision of food and fibers.

“Goals and targets of multifunctional agriculture:

o Enable an adjustment of competitiveness within the EU;

o Consider the diversity of agricultural and socio-economic conditions;

o Take into account the strategic goals of:

o Sustainable management of Europe’s natural resources;

o Improving the health, security and opportunities for EU citizens;

o Enhancing the economic potential and cohesion of an enlarging Europe.

In contrast to these objectives towards sustainable future agricultural land use, the current situation

of agriculture in Europe turns out to be highly diverse and faces typical problems. ...

Typical European realities in the MEA Scope case study areas:

� Significant structural changes, particularly in the dairy and beef production sector;

� Abandonment of farm land or complete quit of farms, shift towards part time farming;

� Diversification of farms, farm households take up activities in other sectors, a process that is often depends on the kind of rural-urban relationships (e.g. in Mugello, Italy and Gudenaa, Denmark);


13

� Ageing of farmers (Combraille, France), migration of young people (Ostprignitz-Ruppin, Germany);

� Competition between nature protection and production (e.g. Piestany, Slovakia and Borsodi Mezoseg, Hungary);

� Technological improvements allowing for integrated economic-environmental cropping management (e.g. Turew, Poland)” (Piorr et alii).

The results collected through the interviews with the experts involved in the workshop do not completely confirm the conclusion given by the European Commissioner during the previously mentioned Congress: “If there was such a contradiction, we have made good progress in resolving

it”. In detail, many experts noted how the Reform is potentially a good starting point to achieve a new productive equilibrium, in the sense that it enables the accomplishment of a good competitiveness thanks to a valorisation of the multifuncionality of agriculture. On the other hand, however, it becomes clear how the effective attainment of the same equilibrium on a wide scale

needs the development of proper instruments for the management of the multifunctional characteristics of the different agricultures.

Actually, the experts believe that the definition of specific payments for the production of externalities and, at a lesser extent, the payments for less advantaged areas are crucial. For the latter, it is important to highlight how the additional payments for the LAA (Less Advantage Areas) have historically been the only adopted measure to support the difficult agricultures characterised

by a very high social value. Nowadays, it is evident how these payments turned out to be not anymore suitable to the new objectives stated by the CAP Reform, because they are not strictly linked to the “production” of externalities. The real problem, in fact, it is not that agriculture is not compatible with the environment in numerous European areas (this is expressed by the fact , that the during the centuries agriculture became an essential element of the environment itself), but that

it is very difficult to maintain and develop agricultures with very high levels of environmental and social multifunctionality, though economically weak. In this perspective the Mid-Term Review (MTR) is insufficient and every choice is referred to the rural development plans realized at regional level. They are asked to set up conditions in order to achieve new rural development

models, able to combine competitiveness and high value of environmental and social services produced. “The main challenge in order to achieve desired long term visions of sustainability for agricultural activity (from the policy field) will be to implement policy measures better spatially and thematically targeted” (Piorr)

From this point of view financing the rural development becomes crucial, hence most of the tools proposed were considered important. In particular, “Payments to enhance social cohesion”###

seems to be the most important followed by the investments to improve the “Quality of life in rural areas”, the measures to foster the “Integration with no-agricultural activities” and the “Payments for young farmers”. Despite the different level of importance given to the different tools, they all are considered as positive to reach sustainability with the exception of “Farmer associations” that is even considered a negative mean to achieve agriculture sustainable scenarios by some experts.


14

Graph 4

2.5 Main cross cutting drivers

The carried out analysis has been completed with the discussion of the most important cross cutting drivers. (Graph 5)

The first element shared by the experts’ in the preliminary discussions concerns the increasing budget difficulties to be faced by the European agriculture and thus a progressive reduction of the

payments in the medium-long term.

Among the elements included in the questionnaire, it is confirmed the “Need of a collective strategy for the rural development” to maintain/encourage a territorially widespread development and to choose a specific development in the urban areas. Strictly related with the strategic desire of a

rural development are “Quality of life in rural areas” and “Training of experts for the agricultural sector”, two aspects recognized as key elements for the understanding of the future of the European agriculture. The ability to offer acceptable conditions of life in rural areas, in terms of income, social interactions and social services, represents a pre-condition for any hypothesis of

rural development, as the chance to attain skilled experts, able to manage the new scenarios.

In this context, a strategic role is also played by the capacity of the sector to adopt innovation and to invest in research, in order both to make the working conditions satisfactory and to offer increasing higher quality and safety products, characterized by production processes with limited

negative impacts on the environment.


15

These elements imply the need of considerable investments in the agricultural sector, mainly to be financed by public budgets. However, this is in contrast to the other strategic directions taken by

the EU. A possible compromise may be the decisive element on which the future of agriculture will be defined. A key role on the matter will be played by the orientations and opinions of the European consumers concerning both the agro-food products and the no marketable goods/services.

Graph 5


16

3 The interactive paper board exercise

To improve the scenario analysis the participants to the workshop were asked to benchmark in a two axis diagram their opinions about some topics of crucial importance for the future of agricultural sector. In the first diagram that we could call “Food production” the strategic options are represented by the type of food source: domestic production versus import, and the production

methode adopted by European farms: intensification versus extensification. Most of the participants matched in a balanced position reflecting the actual situation, but some experts saw a pathway in an intensification of the agricultural practices or an increase in domestic production.

Diagram 1

DOMESTIC

PRODUCTION

INT

ES

IFIC

AT

ION

EX

TE

NS

IFIC

AT

ION

IMPORT

EISA

LUCSUS

DEART

LUCSUS

D

E

A

R

T

INEA

TUSCANY

REGION

UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA

ALL - api

INRA

ZALF

Roy

The second Diagram could be called “Agricultural production strategy”. The two forces are constituted one the one axis by the production intensity versus extensification and on the other axis by the level of diversification between and in regions. The result is a strong preference for a scenario characterized by an high level of differentiation among the agricultures


17

Diagram 2

LUCSUS

INTENSIFICATION EXTENSIFICATION

HO

MO

GE

NE

ITY

wit

hin

& b

etw

ee

nre

gio

ns

DIV

ER

SIT

Y

be

twe

en

& in

reg

ion

s

TUSCANY

REGION

INEAZALF

DEART

UNIV

ERSIT

Y OF B

ARCELO

NA

EISA

INRA

Diagram 3, shows the results of the third exercise “Normative scenario”. The experts define the

future of European agricultural policy according to the policy level of the agriculture regulation and to the need of public subsidies. The experts position is clearly for a subsidies reduction and an increasing importance of regional regulations.

Diagram 3

EU

REGULATION

HIG

H

SU

BS

IDIE

S

LO

W

SU

BS

IDIE

S

LOCAL REGIONAL

AUTONOMY

UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA

TUSCANY

REGION

CE DG

AGRIEISA

INEA

ZALF

INRA

apiDEART

LUCSUS

D

E

A

R

T

roy


18

4 Synthesis

Starting from the following plausible economic general scenario shared by experts:

− Maintenance of the current economic development trends;

− Widening of the free market;

− Reduction of the agricultural budget in the European Union, at least in real terms;

The sustainable scenario for our agriculture could be the following one:

− Diverse agricultures with specific characterizations and social roles are growing.

Three main agricultural development paths for a sustainable agriculture in the future, according to the experts opinions could be the following:

Scenario “Competitiveness”

• Agriculture structure:

o Specialisation;

o Farm size:

Economy of scale:

o Intensive agriculture;

o Quality of food;

o Bioenergy (if strongly financed).

• Main implementation options:

o Investments, new technologies (e.g. precision farming);

o Vertical and horizontal integration with other activities.

• Spatial concentration on productive sites.

Scenario “rural viability”


− Extensive agriculture;

− Organic farming;

− Diversification of farms activities (tourism);

− Farm household activities in other sectors (e.g. tourism);

− Typical food, quality of food;

− Extension of territorial potentials and strengths.


19


− Strong linkage to rural development measures: LEADER, others (e.g. INTERREG);

− Regional networking, farmers involvement in participatory processes;

− Quality of life in rural areas.

• Spatial concentration in areas with high level of social relevance.

Scenario “environment”


− Agro-environmental programmes (AEOs);

− Organic farming;

− Diversity of cropping patterns;

− Low input farming.


− Protected areas;

− Implementation of Cross-Compliance;

− Natura 2000;

− Water Framework Directive WFD, Nitrate Directive;

− Groupement Agricole d'Exploitation en Commun GAEC (Article L323-1 du Code

rural de France).

• Spatial concentration on low productive sites but with high environmental values.

The future of agriculture will be in a combination of these scenarios: Diverse agricultures with

specific characterizations and social roles will coexist according to the predominance in each economic, social, environmental context of their specific functions: productive, social (employment, cultural heritage, etc.), environmental (landscape, hydro geological protection, etc.).

The level at and the modality in which every scenario is going to be realized largely depends on

the evolution of the cross cutting drivers previously mentioned; in particular from the budget that the European agricultural policies will assign to agriculture. However, it is possible to depict some effects that should happen without a strong strategy for the agriculture development:

− Reduction of the agricultural employment;

− Reduction of the productions of the main agro-food products as result of a strong foreign competition;

− Reduction of the number of farms in the magnitude of 30 to 50%;

− Reduction of the agricultural areas from about 20 to 40% due both to an urban sprawl and

to the abandonment of less favoured areas;

− Increase in the agro-food trade deficit.


20

On the contrary these effects could be substantially mitigated, if agricultural and the rural development actions will be efficient, but anyway the majority of the experts” don’t believe in a total

maintenance of AUA. Strong subsidies for biomass production for energy could resolve problems for many crops areas, but this don’t seems enough to invert historical trend in AUA reduction. Furthermore this solution could be not sustainable in some contexts. Biomass production requires subsidies, market protection, it doesn’t contribute to the improvement of professional farmers skills,

it implies large monocultural areas with negative impacts both in terms of biodiversity and of landscape value and it is not linked with the traditional agrifood industries. Besides, in some cases an AUA reduction could be even desirable: for instance for agricultural areas with low social and environmental relevance and with non competitive productions.

A correct application of the MTR tools and particularly of the rural development programmes at the regional scale could generate a reorganization of the agricultural sector with positive results like the following: new models of integrated rural development, restructuring of the farms in a more competitive way, increase of the quality and typical agricultural productions, recovering of the

environment, increasing in the social services offered by agriculture, improving of quality of life of the rural and urban populations, increasing in the energetic self supply.


21

Annex 1

Development of a Forecasting Framework and Scenarios to Support the EU Sustainable Development Strategy SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

PRIORITY 8.1 Policy-oriented research, Scientific support to policies, Integrating and Strengthening the European Research Area

Workshop 1 AGRICULTURE

Development of core elements of integrated sustainability scenarios for agriculture (Goal definition & Pre-Backcasting)

DEART-University of Florence Florence, 19-20 October 2006

You are kindly requested to fill this questionnaire to address the following main workshop questions:

- How could a desired long-term vision of sustainability for agriculture activity/policy field look like, considering environmental, economic and social elements of sustainable development; - Which essential elements of sustainability that are integral part of the vision can be defined for the purpose of developing sustainability scenarios; - How can current policy objectives of topic complexes be translated to match with the objectives sustainability scenario; When answering the following questions, please take into account, that your answers should not be lead by personal/subjective motives, but should always reflect your expert knowledge. NAME _________________________________________________________________ MAIN FIELD OF EXPERTISE_______________________________________________

DESIRED LONG-TERM VISION OF SUSTAINABILITY FOR AGRICULTURE


22

INCREASING DECREASING STABLE DON’T KNOW • Intensive agriculture

• Extensive agriculture

• Organic agriculture

• Agriculture in marginal areas

• Integration with industrial and

tourist activities

• Green high tech agriculture

• Small scale farms

• Large scale farms

• Main production sectors o Cereals o Meat o Milk o Wine o Vegetal oil o Biomass o Renewable energy o Agritourism o Environmental services o Social services

• Other…..


23

REALISTIC SHORT TERM SCENARIO FOR AGRICULTURE

INCREASING DECREASING STABLE DON’T KNOW • Intensive agriculture

• Extensive agriculture

• Organic agriculture

• Agriculture in marginal areas

• Integration with industrial

and tourist activities

• Green high tech agriculture • Small scale farms • Large scale farms • Main production sectors

o Cereals o Meat o Milk o Wine o Vegetal oil o Biomass o Renewable energy o Agritourism o Environmental services o Social services

• Other…..


24

SUSTAINABILITY SCENARIO ELEMENTS (SSES)

INCREASING DECREASING STABLE DON’T KNOW AUA (Agricultural Used Area) Agricultural GDP Agricultural employment Agricultural Land use diversification Regional food supply/consumption Safe food Production Quality food production GMOs Local/Community Food System2 Cultural landscape Rural livelihood Keeping traditional socio-cultural Identity Prevention of migration of rural people to urban areas Animal welfare Agrobiodiversity3 Soil fertility Water management Hydrogeological equilibrium Development and maintenance of rural infrastructure Biotechnology Other……..

2 A community food system, also known as a local food system, "is a collaborative effort to integrate agricultural

production with food distribution to enhance the economic, environmental, and social well-being of a particular place (i.e.

a neighborhood, city, county or region)." [Gail Feenstra and Dave Campbell, "Steps for Developing a Sustainable

Community Food System," Pacific Northwest Sustainable Agriculture: Farming for Profit & Stewardship (Winter 1996-97) 8(4): pp.1,6]

3 Agrobiodiversity "is a fundamental feature of farming systems around the world. It encompasses many types of biological resources tied to agriculture, including: genetic resources - the essential living materials of plants and animals;

• edible plants and crops, including traditional varieties, cultivars, hybrids, and other genetic material developed by breeders; and

• livestock (small and large, lineal breeds or thoroughbreds) and freshwater fish; • soil organisms vital to soil fertility, structure, quality, and soil health; • naturally occurring insects, bacteria, and fungi that control insect pests and diseases of domesticated plants and

animals; • agroecosystem components and types (polycultural/monocultural, small/large scale, rainfed/irrigated, etc.)

indispensable for nutrient cycling, stability, and productivity; and • 'wild' resources (species and elements) of natural habitats and landscapes that can provide services (for

example, pest control and ecosystem stability) to agriculture.


25

MAIN POLITICAL TOOLS IN RELATION TO THE DESIRED LONG TERM SCENARIO

IMPORTANT LESS IMPORTANT NOT IMPORTANT

o Mid term review

o Free market

o Free market with specific payments for: o Less advantaged areas o Production of externalities o Farm Investments o Social interesting productions o Other….

o Financing Rural development

o Quality of life in rural areas o Social cohesion o Agrifood system o Farmers associations o Integration with no-agricultural

Activities o Young farmers o Lifelong learning o Technical assistance o Other….

o Food labeling

o Protected Designation of origin

(PDO)

o Protected Geographical Identification (PGI)

Please specify if you consider the tool as positive or negative (P or N) to achieve the desired scenario.


26

MAIN CROSS CUTTING DRIVERS

IMPORTANT LESS IMPORTANT NOT IMPORTANT

Lack of data & knowledge Main stream economic paradigm Consumption patterns (Perceptions, changed values) Manpower availability in rural areas Quality of life in rural areas Social cohesion Rural development strategy Research and innovation Education International Markets requirements

Date post:	23-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mathieu-saurat
View:	213 times
Download:	1 times

Microsoft Word - FORESCENE_Florence_Report_Part1

Documents