GAEC 5 Direct Payment System Implementation Challenges in Slovakia

• Autorzy: Pipíšková Petra , Muchová Zlatica , Dežerický Dávid , Michal Peter

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12911/22998993/162591

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The Agricultural Payments Agency (supervisory and registry authority) of the Slovak Republic has announced an erosion hazard layer to meet the requirements of GAEC5 (Minimising soil erosion. Limit soil erosion by putting in place suitable practical measures). If a farmer fails to observe the layer data, they will be fined and might lose access to direct subsidies (also known as direct payments). The layer that has been announced raises a number of questions and concerns amongst beneficiaries of direct subsidies and users of land parcels. For instance, with the Pastuchov land parcel, the uncertainties associated with the application of GAEC5 were raised. A comparison of the water erosion layer commitment for 2023 with the erosion calculated by the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) method based on the Digital Relief Model (DRM) generated from airborne laser scanning has confirmed the uniformity in all classified categories of water erosion over a 65% land parcel area. The situation of the land user has been diminished (i.e. they have to comply with GAEC5 even when there is no reason to) over 11% of the area. The situation of the land user has improved over 24% of the area (i.e. they do not have to comply with the conditions even when there is reason to). This paper describes the problems and outlines the possibilities for the necessary adjustment of compliance with the GAEC5 conditions in Slovakia.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

water erosion; conditionality; GAEC5; GSAA; CAP EU; DMR 3.5; DMR 5.0; soil loss

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Inżynierii Ekologicznej ; Lublin University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Journal of Ecological Engineering
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: Vol. 24, nr 6
• Strony: 109--118
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 38 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Pipíšková Petra

• Institute of Landscape Engineering, Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape Engineering, Slovak University of Agriculture, Hospodárska 7, 949 76 Nitra, Slovakia

autor

Muchová Zlatica

• Institute of Landscape Engineering, Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape Engineering, Slovak University of Agriculture, Hospodárska 7, 949 76 Nitra, Slovakia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7067-6768

autor

Dežerický Dávid

• Institute of Landscape Engineering, Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape Engineering, Slovak University of Agriculture, Hospodárska 7, 949 76 Nitra, Slovakia

autor

Michal Peter

• Institute of Landscape Engineering, Faculty of Horticulture and Landscape Engineering, Slovak University of Agriculture, Hospodárska 7, 949 76 Nitra, Slovakia
• Agricultural Paying Agency, Námestie Sv. Anny 7, 911 50 Trenčín, Slovakia

Bibliografia

• 1. Alström K., Akerman A.B. 1992. Contemporary Soil Erosion Rates on Arable Land in Southerm Sweden. Geografiska Annaler. Series A, Physical Geography, 74 (2/3), 101–108. DOI: 10.1080/04353676.1992.11880354.
• 2. Act No. 220/2004 Coll. on the protection and use of agricultural land.
• 3. Boardman J. 2013. Soil Erosion in Britain: Updating the Record. Agriculture, 3, 418–442. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture3030418.
• 4. Coe S., Ares E., Uberoi E. 2021. Tree planting in the UK. UK Parliament. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9084/.
• 5. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2020. Global Biodiversity Outlook 5. https://www.cbd.int/gbo5.
• 6. Ekardt F., Wieding J., Garske B., Stubenrauch J. 2018. Agriculture-related Climate Policies – Law and Governance Issues on the European and Global Level. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPagehandle=hein.journals/cclr2018&div=51&id=&page.
• 7. Erisman et al. 2017. Agriculture and biodiversity: a better balance benefits both. AIMS
• 8. Agriculture and Food, 1(2). Agriculture Report: Biological diversity in agricultural landscapes.
• 9. European Union. 2018. Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/publication/2022/3533-CAP-Final-Report-web.pdf.
• 10. Evans R. 2013. Assessment and monitoring of accelerated water erosion of cultivated land-when will reality be acknowledged? Soil Use and Managment, 105–118. DOI: 10.1111/sum.12010.
• 11. Gebhart M., Dumbrovský M., Šarapatka B., Drbal K., Bednář M., Kapička J., Pavlík F., Kottová B., Zástěra V., Muchová Z. 2023. Evaluation of Monitored Erosion Events in the Context of Characteristics of Source Areas in Czech Conditions. Agronomy, 13(1), 256. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy13010256.
• 12. Heyl K., Döring T., Garske B., Stubenrauch J., Ekardt F. 2020. The Common Agricultural Policy beyond 2020: A critical review in light of global environmental goals. Reciel.
• 13. Hodge I., Hauck J., Bonn A. 2015. The alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies in the European Union. Conservation Biology, 29(4). DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12531.
• 14. Hoper H., Meesenburg H. 2012. Tagungsband 20 Jahre Bodendauerbeobachtung in Niedersachsen. GeoBerichte, 23 (257). https://www.lbeg.niedersachsen.de/karten_daten_publikationen/publikationen/geoberichte/geoberichte-23-108163.html.
• 15. Ilavská B., Jambor P., Lazúr R. 2005. Identification of threats to soil quality from water and wind erosion and proposals for measures. Bratislava: VÚPOP, 2005. 60. (in Slovak)
• 16. Izakovičová Z. 2022. Why Slovakia is losing land. EurActiv. https://euractiv.sk/section/ekonomika-aeuro/news/preco-slovensko-prichadza-o-podu/. (in Slovak)
• 17. Janeček M. et al. Protection of agricultural soils against erosion, Methodologies for implementation of research results into agricultural practice, ÚVTIZ, Praha 2012, 110. (in Czech)
• 18. Kapička J., Žížala D., Krása J., Münster P. 2019. Tools for monitoring agricultural soil erosion. 1st edition. Praha: Research Institute of Melioration and Soil Conservation, 94. (in Czech)
• 19. Kovanič Ľ., Blistan P., Urban R., Štroner M., Blišťanová M., Bartoš K., Pukanská K. 2020. Analysis of the Suitability of High-Resolution DEM Obtained Using ALS and UAS (SfM) for the Identification of Changes and Monitoring the Development of Selected Geohazards in the Alpine Environment—A Case Study in High Tatras, Slovakia. Remote Sensing. DOI: 10.3390/rs12233901.
• 20. Leitmannová K., Galová L., Muchová Z., Šinka K., Dibdiak P. Application of new airborne laser scanning products in land improvement projects. Slovenský geodet a kartograf, ročník XXVI., 2/2021, 5–17. https://www.kgk.sk/uploads/media/web_sgak_2_2021.pdf. (in Slovak)
• 21. Liščák P., Pauditš P., Bystrická G., Teťák F. et al. 2022. Use of DMR 5. 0 from airborne laser scanning in solving geological tasks at ŠGÚDŠ.149–159. (in Slovak)
• 22. Mc Cool, D.K. et al. 1989. Revised slope lenght factor for the Universal Soil Loss Equation. In Transactations of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 32(5), 1571–1576.
• 23. Meredith S., Hart K. 2019. CAP 2021-27: Using the eco-scheme to maximise environmental and climate benefits. Institute for European Environmental Policy. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/4791a221-8525-4410848f8fb84f5a621a/IFOAM%20EU_Eco-scheme_Report_Final.pdf?v=63718564537
• 24. Muchová Z., Raškovič V. 2020. Fragmentation of land ownership in Slovakia: Evolution, context, analysis and possible solutions. Land Use Policy, 95. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104644
• 25. Nilsson L., Clough Y., Smith H.G., Olsson J.A., Brady M.V. et al. 2019. A suboptimal array of options erodes the value of CAP ecological focus areas. Land Use Policy, 85, 407–418. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.005
• 26. Pagáč Mokrá A., Pagáč J., Muchová Z., Petrovič F. 2021. Analysis of Ownership Data from Consolidated Land Threatened by Water Erosion in the Vlára Basin, Slovakia. Sustainability, 13(1), 51. DOI: 10.3390/su13010051
• 27. Panagos P., Ballabio C., Poesen J., Lugato E., Scarpa S., Montanarella L., Borrelli P. 2020. A Soil Erosion Indicator for Supporting Agricultural, Environmental and Climate Policies in the European Union. Remote Sensing of Soil Erosion, 12(9), 1365. DOI: 10.3390/rs12091365
• 28. Pauditšová E., Pauditš P., Gazzola P., Belčáková I. 2018. Case studies. Landscape impact assessment in planning processes, 139–208.
• 29. Prasuhn V. 2011. Soil erosion in the Swiss midlands: Results of a 10-year field survey. Geomorphology, 126(1–2), 32–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.10.023
• 30. Rodriguez-Blanco M.L., Taboada-Castro M.M. 2013. Linking the field to the stream: Soil erosion and sediment yield in a rural catchment, NW Spain. Catena, 102, 74–81. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2010.09.003
• 31. Slovak Government Regulation No 435/2022 laying down the requirements for the maintenance of agricultural area, active farmer and conditionality.
• 32. Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic. 2022.https://datacube.statistics.sk/#!/view/sk/VBD_SK_WIN/pl5001rr/v_pl5001rr_00_00_00_sk. (in Slovak)
• 33. STN 75 4501 – Conservation of agricultural soils. Basic regulations.
• 34. United Nations Climate Change. 2015. Paris Agreement. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement.
• 35. Vácha R. 2022. 10 years of Agricultural Soil Erosion Monitoring in the Czech Republic. https://www.spucr.cz/tiskovy-servis/tiskove-zpravy/2022/predni-cesti-experti-na-protierozni-ochranu-pudyse-setkali-v-praze.html. (in Czech)
• 36. Van Oost K., Govers G., Cerdan O., Thauré D., Van Rompaey A., Steegen A., Poesen J. 2005. Spatially distributed data for erosion model calibration and validation: The Ganspoel and Kinderveld datasets. Catena, 61, 105-121. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2005.03.001
• 37. Wishmeier W.H., Smith D. 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses. Washington D.C.: Agricultural Handbook No. 537, USDA.
• 38. Zinngrebe Y., Pe´er G., Schuler S., Schmitt J., Schmidt J., Lakner S. 2017. The EU’s ecological focus areas – How experts explain farmers’ choices in Germany. Land Use Policy, 65, 93–108. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.03.027.