It's time for sustainable, environmental performance

1. Making agriculture sustainable is a global challenge. In the European Union (EU), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is failing with respect to biodiversity, climate, soil, land degradation as well as socio-economic challenges.2. The European Commission's proposal for a CAP post-2020 provides a scope for enhanced sustainability. However, it also allows Member States to choose low-ambition implementation pathways. It therefore remains essential to address citizens' demands for sustainable agriculture and rectify systemic weaknesses in the CAP, using the full breadth of available scientific evidence and knowledge.3. Concerned about current attempts to dilute the environmental ambition of the future CAP, and the lack of concrete proposals for improving the CAP in the draft of the European Green Deal, we call on the European Parliament, Council and Commission to adopt 10 urgent action points for delivering sustainable food production, biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation. Market measures : 5.3 % Coupled payments : 10.2 % Direct payments (decoupled) : 40.5 % Greening (ineffective)* : 18 % Greening (effective)* : 3 % AECM** : 6.3 % ANC : 3.7 % RDP + other expenditure : 13.1 % Pillar 1 Pillar 2 | 307 People and Nature PE'ER Et al.

Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) are one of the three new greening measures of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). We used an interdisciplinary and European‐scale approach to evaluate ecological effectiveness and farmers’ perception of the different EFA options. We assessed potential benefits of EFA options for biodiversity using a survey among 88 ecologists from 17 European countries. We further analyzed data on EFA uptake at the EU level and in eight EU Member States, and reviewed socio‐economic factors influencing farmers’ decisions. We then identified possible ways to improve EFAs. Ecologists scored field margins, buffer strips, fallow land, and landscape features as most beneficial whereas farmers mostly implemented “catch crops and green cover,” nitrogen‐fixing crops, and fallow land. Based on the expert inputs and a review of the factors influencing farmers’ decisions, we suggest that EFA implementation could be improved by (a) prioritizing EFA options that promote biodiversity (e.g., reducing the weight or even excluding ineffective options); (b) reducing administrative constraints; (c) setting stricter management requirements (e.g., limiting agrochemical use); and (d) offering further incentives for expanding options like landscape features and buffer strips. We finally propose further improvements at the next CAP reform, to improve ecological effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness.

Peatlands are lands with a peat layer at the surface, containing a large proportion of organic carbon. Such lands cover ≈1 000 000 km2 in Europe, which is almost 10% of the total surface area. In many countries, peatlands have been artificially drained over centuries, leading to not only enormous emissions of CO2 but also soil subsidence, mobilization of nutrients, higher flood risks, and loss of biodiversity. These problems can largely be solved by stopping drainage and rewetting the land. Wet peatlands do not release CO2, can potentially sequester carbon, help to improve water quality, provide habitat for rare and threatened biodiversity, and can still be used for production of biomass (“paludiculture”). Wisely adjusted land use on peatlands can substantially contribute to low‐emission goals and further benefits for farmers, the economy, society, and the environment.

No abstract