The redefinition of Europe's Less Favoured Areas

The support scheme for farming in less-favoured areas, established by the European Union in 1975, marked a major change in the nature of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) by introducing for the first time regional categories. It also represented the initiation of direct annual payments to farmers, an approach which was to expand greatly in the 1990s and thereafter. Over a long period it had remained the only significant structural measure of agricultural policy with a territorial dimension. Only recent policy reforms changed this situation: commodity market support was gradually decreased and, on the other hand, the environmental implications of policy measures were increasingly emphasised. Discussions on the interrelations of the Less-Favoured Areas (LFA) scheme with Agri-Environmental Measures (AEM) and other elements of the Rural Development Programmes (RDP) have been intensified as the political and financial weight of the programmes gained in importance. This paper focuses on the objectives and relevance of the LFA support scheme, its application in the EU and the main elements of the debate for the redefinition of LFA support. From the very beginning, LFA policy was conceived as a structural policy aimed at the prevention of land abandonment, to preserve the farming population in these areas and maintain cultural landscapes. In this regard, the instrument was one of the first measures to address environmentally beneficial farming systems, and thus reveals high coincidence with High Nature Value (HNV) farming systems. The three types of LFA, mountain areas, other LFAs and areas affected by specific handicaps take account of the range of geographical differences in the production difficulties of EU agriculture. The increased focus on environmental aims resulted in a discussion of the ‘intermediate’ areas, the category of other LFAs. It has been proposed that the socio-economic criterion in determining these areas should be dropped, but the aim to maintain land management in marginal areas would be kept. Meanwhile, the decision on the redefinition of the LFAs has been postponed (to 2010). Nevertheless the issue will keep a central role in policy discussions of the future Rural Development Programmes.Less-Favoured Areas; Common Agricultural Policy; rural development; mountain areas

The on-going CAP-reform – incentive for a shift towards rural development activities?

The paper is based on the findings of a 2 year, EU-wide project on the territorial impacts of the CAP (ESPON project 2.1.3). It particularly focuses on the territorial impact of the different components of CAP and assesses the changes towards rural development policy. The results presented are derived from statistical analysis of the database augmented by findings from an EU-wide review of literature and a series of case studies on the implementation experiences of the main rural development measures across the EU. It is shown that pillar 2 support is still strongly centred on agricultural measures and actors and far from reaching its potential for enhancing a more generally applied rural development strategy. The discussion of the paper will focus on the differing national priorities, and the uneven allocation of RDR funds, partly due to difficulties of co-financing in poorer regions. Importantly, analysis of the impact of the Mid Term Review proposals on farm incomes suggests that the latest reforms of the CAP do not improve substantially the consistency between the CAP, and cohesion. In particular, the proposed application of the CAP-reform in different member states shall be discussed and assessed whether the changes in the framework of rural development contribute to achieve a more balanced performance across EU countries and regions.Common Agricultural Policy (CAP); CAP-reform; rural development; territorial cohesion

The quest for countryside support schemes for mountain areas in Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs)

Regional divergence between different areas of CEECs has considerably risen over the integration period into Western Europe economy in last decade. The EU enlargement process thus has to pay specific attention to its regional implications and to effects on regions with lagging economic development and structural problems. Particularly mountain areas have, in general, to overcome handicaps of geographical peripheral location and low competivity. As the agricultural sector is still of significant relevance in these areas the preparation for the adoption of the EU Common Agricultural Policy is of major concern. The paper draws on a national research project, commissioned by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Resources, and investigates the support schemes for mountain areas being established in the CEECs, particularly those aiming at preserving diversified countryside and outstanding cultural landscapes, as a means to nurture overall regional development. It also focuses on the need for regional policies enlarging the scope of economic activities in the peripheral mountain areas. In this context experiences from EU countries 0on policies for mountainous and less-favoured areas (LFA) and examples of successful local approaches in EU mountain regions are used. (paper prepared for conference theme: Regional disparities, problems and policies thematic area: Problems of mountainous, rural, peripheral and other lagging regions)

The territorial dimension of the Common Agricultural and Rural Development policy (CAP) and its relation to cohesion objectives

An increasing focus on rural development issues has characterised the discussion of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform. This reflects new societal demands for tasks and services provided by agriculture particularly in mountain and less-favoured areas (LFA). The regional distribution of CAP and Rural Development support underpins the argument that the territorial dimension implied by CAP reforms has not yet been taken sufficiently into account. The regional variation in the distribution of the LFA scheme between member states testifies this imbalance and underscores country specific priorities. LFAs will have to prove that they are more than a compensation measure, but already providing a range of multifunctional tasks.territorial impact, rural development, less-favoured areas, LFA scheme, CAP reform

Assessment of rural development programmes to enhance youth integration

In recent years concern about social exclusion processes has reached also rural areas. The rising unemployment and the limited opportunities for young people have turned the attention of policy analysis to this social group and to processes of social exclusion under these specific regional conditions. The results presented are drawn from the EU-project “Policies and young people in rural development” under the 4th Framework programme (FAIR6 CT-98-4171) where different aspects of economic and social integration/exclusion of young people in rural areas and their recognition in rural development programmes of the EU has been analysed. The paper focuses on the scope to enhance the aspect of young people integration in rural/regional programmes. To this end, it starts with a presentation of the policy background and its evaluation, particularly with regard to its rising priority over the last EU-reforms. It continues with the investigation of selected exemplary cases of policy measures and initiatives specifically addressing young people in rural development provided by the seven project partners study areas. The concluding part draws on evaluation studies on rural development programmes all over the European Union with regard to youth participation and explores the scope for future strengthening of respective activities and inclusion of young people concerns in rural development programmes. Experiences from this analysis suggests that with fundamental changes in the market structures and relations programmes targeted at specific rural areas cannot neglect the emerging interrelations to other areas. Hence a rural policy addressing the needs of young people has to address directly its insertion into the regional framework and its relation to regional policy. (Paper for conference theme "Socio-economic cohesion and regional/local development", thematic area %22Socio-economic exclusion")