version: September 2019
RO
Analytical factsheet for Romania:
Nine objectives for a future Common Agricultural Policy
This factsheet provides an overview of the agricultural sector and rural development in Romania. The factsheet presents facts and figures for each of the 9 specific objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2020, as proposed by the Commission on 1 June 2018 (COM(2018)392 final). The information reflects all common context indicators and impact indicators in relation to agriculture and rural development for which data is available to date. This factsheet is based on available information received from Member States by the Commission up to August 2019. It is made available without prejudice to any finding in respect of Member State compliance with the regulatory framework and does not prejudge on Member States' future CAP Strategic Plans.
1 Table of contents impact in Indicator Source Current CMEF indicator PMEF Support viable farm income and resilience across the Union to enhance food security Agricultural income versus general economy EUROSTAT yes Impact indicator I.01 Evolution of agricultural income EUROSTAT yes Impact indicators I.01 & I.02 Evolution of agricultural income by sector DG AGRI - FADN yes Evolution of agricultural income by farm size DG AGRI - FADN Evolution of agricultural income in ANC areas DG AGRI - FADN yes Enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness Total factor productivity EUROSTAT yes Impact indicator I.03 Gross fixed capital formation in agriculture EUROSTAT Context indicator C.28 Cost and revenue structure of income EUROSTAT Agri-food trade imports and exports COMEXT yes Impact indicator I.06 Ratio EU prices versus world market DG AGRI, FAOSTAT Impact indicator I.04 Number of farms, hectares and Livestock units EUROSTAT Context C.17, C.18, C.21, C.33 Improve the farmers' position in the value chain Value added for primary producers in food chain EUROSTAT yes Result indicator Pillar I Agricultural output per sector EUROSTAT
Contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as sustainable energy GHG emissions from agriculture EEA yes Impact indicator I.07 Mean organic carbon content JRC yes Impact indicator I.12 Production of renewable energy from agriculture EURObserv'ER, … yes Context indicator C.43 Physical area under AECM AIR Foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural resources such as water, soil and air % of agricultural area at risk of soil erosion JRC yes Impact indicator I.13 Ammonia emissions from agriculture EEA yes Impact indicator I.07 Gross nutrient balance in agricultural land EEA yes Impact indicator I.11 Nitrates in groundwater EEA yes Impact indicator I.11 Water abstraction in agriculture EUROSTAT Impact indicator I.10, C.20 Contribution to the protection of biodiversity, enhance ecosystem services and preserve habitats and landscapes Farmland Bird Index EBCC-PECBMS yes Impact indicator I.08 Conservation status of agricultural habitats EEA-DG ENV Context indicator C.36 Average number of linear elements JRC Area under NATURA 2000 NATURA 2000 Barometer Context indicator C.34
Attract young farmers and facilitate business development in rural areas Age structure of farm managers by gender EUROSTAT Context indicator C.23 Agricultural training of farm managers <35 years EUROSTAT Context indicator C.24 Economic farm size by age class EUROSTAT Promote employment, growth, social inclusion and local development in rural areas, including bio- economy and sustainable forestry Employment rate in predominantly rural areas EUROSTAT yes Impact indicator I.14 GDP per head in predominantly rural areas EUROSTAT yes Impact indicator I.16 Distribution of direct aids DG AGRI (CATS) yes Poverty index in rural areas EUROSTAT yes Impact indicator I.15 Tourism infrastructure EUROSTAT Context indicator C.30 Improve the response of EU agriculture to societal demands on food and health, including safe, nutritious and sustainable food, as well as animal welfare Sales of veterinary antimicrobial agents ESVAC yes Sales of plant protection products EUROSTAT Farming intensity DG AGRI - FADN Context indicator C.33 Area under organic farming EUROSTAT Context indicator C.19
Fostering knowledge, innovation and digitalisation in agriculture % RD budget to knowledge and innovation DG AGRI (SFC) yes Number of EIP operational groups DG AGRI Agricultural training of farm managers EUROSTAT Context indicator C.24
2 SUPPORT VIABLE FARM INCOME AND RESILIENCE ACROSS THE UNION TO ENHANCE FOOD SECURITY More information on this objective in the brief on ensuring viable farm income
Reducing income disparities Evolution of agricultural income compared to general economy Methodology (I.1)
In Romania, the agricultural income per worker was on average 55% of the wage in the whole economy between 2005 and 2018. This share ranges from the minimum level of 40% registered in 2007 to 76% in 2011 and it is above the EU average share. The peak in 2011 is linked to a good year in crop production. At EU level, the gap between the agricultural income per worker and the average wage in the economy seems to be closing over time.
Agricultural entrepreneurial income per worker compared to average wages in whole economy (based on EUR/hour worked) 80%
60%
40%
20%
0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Agricultural entrepreneurial income+wages per worker EU-28 average Source: DG AGRI - EUROSTAT Find here a comparison per MS based on 2011-2013 data
Reducing farm income variability Evolution of agricultural income Methodology (I.01 & I.02)
In Romania, the average agricultural factor income per worker fluctuates around EUR 3 340 between 2005 and 2018. The average agricultural income per worker is increasing over time. Direct payments form about 23% of the agricultural factor income in Romania in 2017. Payments under Pillar II (except investment subsidies) are around 5% of the factor income. €20 000
€15 000
€10 000
€5 000
€0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Agricultural entrepreneurial income + wages /per AWU Agricultural factor income per AWU in real terms Agricultural entrepreneurial income + wages /per AWU - EU-28 Agricultural factor income per AWU in real terms - EU-28
Source: DG AGRI - EUROSTAT Supporting viable farm income Evolution of agricultural income level by sector
The income per worker is above average for specialist cereals-oilseeds-protein crops farms (COP) and other field crops and granivores. Farmers with arable crops are on average bigger in Romania and, therefore, receive a larger amount of direct payments compared to other sectors. Income per worker is on average lower in mixed and horticulture farms. Currently, Romania uses its voluntary coupled support (VCS) budget mainly for the dairy sector and protein crops.
In RO, the income per worker increases with farm size.
Note: The four graphs below are based on FADN data. Please note that FADN data is based on a sample survey, with the sample partly different each year. FADN is based on a sample of farms throughout Europe representing only the so-called professional farms, i.e. farms above a certain threshold of economic size. This explains the differences in income level between FADN and EUROSTAT data.
3 Farm net value added per AWU by sector € 16 000 milk
€ 14 000 sheep and goat € 12 000 cattle € 10 000 € 8 000 granivores
€ 6 000 mixed livestock € 4 000 mixed crops and livestock € 2 000 € 0 apiculture 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 € 25 000 COP crops € 20 000 other fieldcrops
€ 15 000 mixed crops
horticulture € 10 000 orchards-fruits € 5 000 Permanent crops combined € 0 wine 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: DG AGRI - FADN Evolution of agricultural income level by (physical) farm size
Find more information on CAP income support in the dashboard - Farming Income support
Contributing to territorial balance Evolution of agricultural income in areas with natural constraints
In Romania, the agricultural factor income per worker (FNVA/AWU in FADN) is on average higher in non ANC areas, with the exception of 2015-2017 when the income was higher in ANC other than mountain areas (income about 30% above the 'not in ANC' areas). The total area designated with natural constraints (ANC) covers around 50% of the Romanian agricultural area and 14.3% of the RD envelope is programmed for ANC payments (total public expenditures). The ANC designation changed in the current CAP, which can potentially explain the changing trend after 2014.
Agricultural factor income per worker in areas with natural constraints € 10 000
€ 8 000
€ 6 000
€ 4 000
€ 2 000
€ - 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
FNVA/AWU in ANC/LFA areas other than mountain FNVA/AWU in mountain ANC/LFA areas FNVA/AWU not in ANC/LFA areas
Source: DG AGRI - FADN
4 ENHANCE MARKET ORIENTATION AND INCREASE COMPETITIVENESS
Increase farm productivity Total factor productivity Methodology (I.03) Methodology (C.22) The total factor productivity (TFP) is increasing in Romania. Overall, all components of the partial productivity are increasing (with some exceptions in some years). Labour productivity increases mainly due to the outflow of labour (-42% between 2005 and 2017). The capital productivity presents the returns on investments. Land productivity reflect the developments in yields and rents. Total factor productivity in agriculture (TFP Index 2005 EU = 100) 175
150
125
100
75
50 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total factor productivity (TFP) labour productivity capital productivity land productivity Source: EUROSTAT for TFP and DG AGRI for partial productivity
Gross fixed capital formation in agriculture in EUR million (current prices) Methodology (C.28)
The indicator measures producers’ investments, deducting disposals, in fixed assets plus certain additions to the value of non-produced assets (e.g. land) realized by the productive activity of producer or institutional units.
1 600 1 400 1 200 1 000 800 600 400 200 - 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: EUROSTAT
Cost and revenue structure of agricultural income (real prices) in million EUR
30 000 25 000 20 000 15 000 10 000 5 000 0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Crop output Animal output Product subsidies Other subsidies Agricultural services output Non-agricultural secondary Seeds Energy Fertilisers Plant/animal protection Feedingstuffs Labour Rents Interest Taxes Other costs Entrepreneurial income Source: EUROSTAT
5 Harness Agri-food trade Agri-food trade imports and exports Methodology (I.06)
Romania has a positive agri-food trade balance with countries outside the EU (EXTRA EU-28), mainly on commodities. On the other hand, the intra-EU trade balance (between Romania and the other EU Member States) is negative. Overall, the trade balance of Romania (with both EU and non EU countries) is negative in the last four years.
Structure of Agri-food trade with all countries in millions of EUR 8 000 EXPORT 6 000 4 000 2 000 0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Commodities Other primary Processed Food preparations IMPORT Beverages Non-edible Balance
Structure of Agri-food trade with non-EU countries in millions of EUR 3 000 EXPORT 2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 0 500 1 000 1 500 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Commodities Other primary Processed Food preparations IMPORT Beverages Non-edible Balance
Structure of Agri-food trade with EU countries in millions of EUR 6 000 EXPORT
4 000
2 000
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Commodities Other primary Processed Food preparations IMPORT Beverages Non-edible Balance Source: COMEXT Find more information about the competitiveness of the EU on the dashboard - Market Orientation
6 Ratio between EU and world market prices for the main agricultural products
Data are at EU level. The shift away from market management increased trade opportunities and reduced the price gap between EU and world market prices over time.
3.25 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Soft wheat Beef Pigmeat Poultry Butter Cheese (cheddar) SMP sugar
Source: AGRIVIEW, FAOSTAT and other data See the EU Market Observatories for prices at MS level
Number of farms, number of hectares and number of livestock units Methodology (C.17, C.18, C.21, C.33)
The total number of farms has declined between 2005 and 2016 in Romania, from about 4.3 to 3.4 million farms. The average farm size has increased, from 3.3 to 4 hectares in the same time period. The total agricultural area has declined by 5% in the same time period, from 14.2 million hectares in 2005 to 13.5 million hectares in 2016, mainly due to the decline in arable land. The number of livestock units has decreased from 6.6 million LU in 2005 to 4.8 million LU in 2016. The livestock density (calculated as total number of livestock units/total utilised agricultural area) has decreased from 0.47 in 2005 to 0.36 in 2016. The share of agricultural area of extensive grazing (area under grazing livestock production below 1 LU/ha of forage area) remained stable, at 37% of the total UAA (with the exception of 2007, when it was 39%).
number of farms number of hectares (x1000) number of livestock units 8 000 000 0.50 4 500 000 4.5 16 000 4 000 000 4.0 14 000 0.40 6 000 000 3 500 000 3.5 12 000 3 000 000 3.0 10 000 0.30 2 500 000 2.5 4 000 000 8 000 2 000 000 2.0 0.20 6 000 1 500 000 1.5 2 000 000 1 000 000 1.0 4 000 0.10 500 000 0.5 2 000 - - - 0.0 - 2005 2007 2010 2013 2016 2005 2007 2010 2013 2016 2005 2007 2010 2013 2016 LU farms average farm size PG AL PC LU/ha Areas of extensive grazing Source: EUROSTAT
7 IMPROVE THE FARMERS' POSITION IN THE VALUE CHAIN
For more information, see also the brief on the farmers' position in the value chain Improving the farmers' position in the value chain Value added for primary producers in the food chain
The share of the value added for primary producers in the food chain has decreased in the last years in Romania in favour of the food and beverage distribution and consumer services. Nevertheless, the share of the value added that goes to agriculture is much higher in Romania than the EU-average. In 2016, 59% of the value added in the food chain went to primary producers in Romania versus 23% in the EU-28.
Value added for primary producers in the food chain in million EUR 20 000 100.0%
80.0% 15 000
60.0% 10 000 40.0%
5 000 20.0%
- 0.0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 primary producers food and beverage manufacturing food and beverage distribution food and beverage consumer services % for primary producers (right axis) EU-28 Source: EUROSTAT
Agricultural output per sector
The circle diagram gives an overview of the importance of different sectors based on the output at production value. Cereals, fruit and vegetables, industrial crops and milk are the most important sectors in terms of production value in Romania in 2017.
AGRICULTURAL OUTPUT PER SECTOR PRODUCTS % in MS % of EU-28 PRODUCTION VALUE AT BASIC PRICES IN 2017 Crop output, of which: 74.2% 5.3% Cereals (including seeds) 25.8% 8.8% Industrial crops 11.5% 8.0% Forage plants 8.4% 5.7% Vegetables & horticulture 13.9% 3.8% Potatoes (including seeds) 5.6% 7.8% Fruits 6.8% 3.9% Wine 2.0% 1.5% Olive oil 0.0% 0.0% Animal output, of which: 25.8% 2.3% Cattle 1.9% 0.9% Pigs 5.9% 2.4% Sheep and goats 1.2% 3.3% Poultry 3.0% 2.2% Milk 6.9% 1.8% Eggs 4.4% 6.8% Source: EUROSTAT
8 CONTRIBUTE TO CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION, AS WELL AS SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
For more information on this objective, see also the CAP brief on agriculture and climate mitigation Contribute to climate change mitigation Reducing GHG emissions from agriculture Methodology (I.07)
In Romania, the total emissions of greenhouse gasses from agriculture decreased between 1995 and 2016 by 24% (-12% in EU-28). Nevertheless, the share of agriculture in the total net emissions increased from 13% in 1995 to 18% in 2016. The emission of CH4 and N2O per hectare of UAA in Romania is among the lowest in the EU.
GHG emissions from agriculture (including cropland and grassland) (1 000t of CO2 equivalent) 25 000 20%
20 000 15%
15 000 10% 10 000
5% 5 000
- 0% 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 GHG emissions from agriculture (including cropland and grassland) share of agriculture (including soils) in total net emissions share of agriculture (incl. soils) in total net emmissions - EU-28
Source: EEA Click here for an overview of the GHG emission from agriculture per hectare by MS
Enhancing carbon sequestration Increase the soil organic carbon Methodology (I.12)
This indicator estimates the total organic carbon content in arable soils. Soil organic carbon, the major component of soil organic matter, is extremely important in all soil processes. It is also important for the earth's ability to bind water and thus cope with large fluctuations in precipitation, which is important in terms of climate adaptation. The annual rate of loss of organic matter can vary greatly, depending on cultivation practices, the type of plant/crop cover, drainage status of the soil and weather conditions. The mean Soil Organic Carbon concentration per Member State is solely for orientation purposes since it has very limited scientific meaning given the high variability of Soil Organic Carbon concentration in different areas.
Mean organic carbon content in g/kg 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 - AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK
2009 2015
Source: JRC Click here to see a map at regional level (De Brogniez et al., 2014)
More information about soils in the brief on efficient soil management Click here to see the dashboard on climate change and air quality
9 Increase sustainable energy in agriculture Production of renewable energy from agriculture and forestry Methodology (C.43)
The following graph shows the production of renewable energy (RE) from agriculture (biodiesel, biogas and bioethanol) and forestry in tonnes of oil equivalent per 1000 hectares of land. Data for the production of RE from agriculture for 2014 and 2016 are not available. The graph also shows the importance of agriculture and forestry for the production of renewable energy. Finally the graph shows the use of renewable energy in agriculture and forestry as a share of the direct use of energy in the agriculture and forestry (it does not include food processing).
Romania shows a relatively stable trend in the production of RE from agriculture and forestry per hectare in the last years, that lies below the EU-average. The share of production of RE from agriculture and forestry in Romania is higher than the EU average. Around 62% of the total RE production in Romania was coming from agriculture and forestry in 2015. However, the use of RE in agriculture and forestry in Romania is around 2%.
Production of renewable energy from agriculture and forestry in toe/1000 hectares and consumption of renewable energy by agriculture/forestry 800 80%
600 60%
400 40%
200 20%
- 0% 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 production of renewable energy from agriculture in toe/1000 hectares - EU-28 production of renewable energy from forestry in toe/1000 hectares - EU-28 production of renewable energy from agriculture in toe/1000 hectares production of renewable energy from forestry in toe/1000 hectares Production of renewable energy from agriculture and forestry as % of total renewable energy production Production of renewable energy from agriculture and forestry as % of total renewable energy production - EU-28 Renewable energy consumption in agriculture/forestry as % of direct use of energy in agriculture/forestry Source: EUROSTAT and DG AGRI estimates based on EurObserv'ER, EBB and Tallage's report Stratégie grains
Physical area under Agri-Environment-Climate Measures (AECM)
Romania has a share of physical area under Agri-environment and climate measures of 5% in 2017. The physical area measures the total number of hectares with at least one AECM commitment.
N.B.: The percentage of physical area under AECM builds up over time, therefore the physical area is compared to the target set by each MS (compared to the UAA in 2017). Specific support for organic farming - covered by a different rural development measure - is not included.
physical area under AECM as % of UAA in 2017 100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
physical area under AECM as % of UAA target
Source: Annual implementation reports
Click here to see the summary dashboard on environment and climate action
10 FOSTER SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SUCH AS WATER, SOIL AND AIR
Reducing soil erosion Share of land in moderate and severe soil erosion on agricultural land Methodology (I.13) click here to see a map at regional level (JRC) Agricultural area is at risk of soil erosion if the rate of soil erosion is more than 11 tonnes per hectare per year. The rate at Member State level represents national average values, therefore, it may mask higher erosion rates in many areas even though a country has a low mean. As it is now, the indicator can only give an indication of the erosion of soil in particular contexts. The estimated erosion rates are linked to agricultural practices and therefore the indicator reflects and captures the effects of policy measures to prevent erosion by agriculture. Moreover, the indicator gives only estimations and it is not directly measurable since it is based on modelling and estimations from different sources and parameters. At the national average, the share of area at risk of soil erosion in 2012 in Romania was 9.7%, which is above the average at EU level (6.7%). At regional level, the soil loss rate is moderate low (between 2% and 5%) in most of the regions. The highest risk in Romania (moderate: between 5% and 10%) in the area of Cluj, Botoşani and Iaşi. In 2017, 2% of agricultural land in RO was under contracts to improve soil management.
Source: JRC - ISPRA Click here to find information on the % of land under contracts to improve soil
Improve air quality Reduce ammonia emissions from agriculture Methodology (I.07)
There is a downward trend in the total ammonia emission from agriculture in the EU, but it is slightly increasing as of 2013. In general, the emissions in Romania are rather stable since 2010, on average around 150 000 tonnes. Romania is ahead to achieve the NH3 emission targets for 2020 (-13% compared to 2005) as established by the NEC Directive and it is not far from the 2030 target (-25%).
N.B. Note the scaling of the axis.
Total ammonia emissions from agriculture (in 1 000 t of NH3) 200 4 200
4 000 150
3 800 100 3 600
50 3 400
- 3 200 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total ammonia emissions from agriculture (in 1 000 t of NH3) EU-28 average
Source: EEA Click for more information on NH3 emission targets (p.23) and emission per ha by MS (p.27)
11 Improve water quality Gross nutrient balance on agricultural land Methodology (I.11)
The two water quality indicators below show the potential impact of agriculture on water quality due to pollution by nitrates and phosphates. Where N and P are applied in excess, they can cause surface and groundwater pollution and eutrophication. The gross nutrient balance provides an estimate of the potential water pollution. The actual concentration is shown in the second graph. The nitrogen and phosphorus surplus in Romania have a downward trend (despite fluctuations). In 2012, 83% of the ground water stations in Romania where of high quality; 7% of poor quality. Under rural development, 11.9% of agricultural land in RO is under contracts to improve water management in 2016.
kg N/ha/year Potential surplus of N and P on agricultural land kg P/ha/year 60.0 9.0
40.0 6.0
20.0 3.0
0.0 0.0
-20.0 -3.0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 potential surplus of nitrogen on agricultural land (in kg N/ha/year) N surplus - EU-28 potential surplus of phosphorus on agricultural land (in kg P/ha/yr) (right axis) Source: EEA Click here to view a comparison of the GNB by country Reducing nutrient leakage Nitrate in groundwater - percentage of groundwater stations with N concentration over 50 mg/l as per Nitrate directive. Groundwater stations exceeding 50 mg/l are in breach of the Nitrate Directive.
Water quality (in NO3 in mg/l) in groundwater stations in 2012 100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
high quality moderate quality (>= 25mg/l and <50 mg/l) poor quality (>= 50 mg/l)
Source: EEA Reducing pressure on water resource
The new impact indicator 'Water Exploitation Index Plus (WEI+)', aims to illustrate the percentage used of the total renewable freshwater resources available in a defined territory (basin, sub-basin etc.) for a given time step (e.g., seasonal, annual). As this indicator is up to now only available per river (sub-)basin, this factsheet presents data on water abstraction. Water abstraction from agriculture Methodology (I.10) Methodology (C.20) This indicator refers to the volume of water which is applied to soils for irrigation purposes. Data concern water abstraction from total surface and groundwater and are provided voluntarily by MS. Data for water use in agriculture are very difficult to get since many farmers use water from streams, wells and ponds. The water abstraction in Romania shows a fluctuating trend, stabilising in the recent years around lower values than in the past. 1.9% of the total UAA is irrigated in 2016.
Total water abstraction in agriculture (1 000 m3) 2 000 000
1 500 000
1 000 000
500 000
- 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: EUROSTAT Find here the data for the Water Exploitation Index Plus per river basin Find more information about water quality and quantity in the related dashboard
12 CONTRIBUTION TO THE PROTECTION OF BIODIVERSITY, ENHANCE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND PRESERVE HABITATS AND LANDSCAPES
Increasing farmland bird population Farmland Bird Index Methodology (I.08)
The farmland bird indicator is intended as a barometer of change for the biodiversity of agricultural landscapes in Europe. The indicator is a composite index that measures the rate of change in the relative abundance of common bird species at selected sites. The "EU list of species" currently covers 39 species which are dependent on farmland for feeding and nesting and are not able to thrive in other habitats. The population counts are carried out by a network of volunteer ornithologists coordinated by national schemes. No data is available for Romania.
120
100
80
60
40
20
- 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Farmland birds index (FBI) (Index 2000 = 100) EU-28
Source: EBCC/RSPB/BirdLife/Statistics Netherlands: the European Bird Census Council (EBCC) and its Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme (PECBMS) Enhanced biodiversity protection Percentage of species and habitats of Community interest related to agriculture with stable or increasing trends This indicator is under development. The new impact indicator will be based on the indicator below.
Conservation status of grassland habitats Methodology (C.36)
The context indicator covers a set of habitat types (listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive) which are considered to be of European interest that are linked to agro- and grassland ecosystems. Trends in this indicator should primarily be influenced by the implementation of measures under the Habitats Directive, such as the establishment of the Natura 2000 Network and habitats and species protection measures. Data for Romania are available only for a limited number of regions (mainly the mountain areas). Among these areas for which data are available, 86% is in a favourable status, 14% of grassland has an unfavourable-inadequate- bad conservation status.
Conservation status of grassland habitats (% of assessment of habitats) in 2012 100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK
favourable unfavourable-inadequate unfavourable-bad unknown
Source: EEA - DG ENV Click here for more information at regional level (p.44) see also the dashboard on biodiversity on the Europa website
13 Enhanced provision of ecosystem Share of Utilised Agricultural Area covered with landscape features This indicator is under development. The following map gives an idea of landscape elements on agricultural area.
Average number of linear elements per transect with agriculture as main land cover, 2015
The map shows the density of linear features in agricultural land per NUTS3 region (average number of linear elements per point) based on the LUCAS survey 2015. The map shows in yellow and orange the regions with a low density of linear elements. In some cases this is related to the presence of large Alpine pastures. Landscape features are supplying many benefits to agro-ecosystems and the wider environment. In Romania, the average number of linear elements is below the EU average, especially in the Southern regions.
Source: JRC 2017 More information on p.48 in the following document
Area under NATURA 2000 Methodology (C.34) The Natura 2000 network is an EU-wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive. The aim of the network is to assure the long-term survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats. Forest and agricultural area protected under NATURA 2000 in 2016 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
share of forest area (including transitional woodland-shrub) share of agricultural area (including natural grassland)
Source: NATURA 2000 Barometer Statistics Reports, NATURA 2000 data and CORINE Land Cover (CLC)
14 ATTRACT YOUNG FARMERS AND FACILITATE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL AREAS
Attracting young farmers The new impact indicator 'evolution of number of new farmers' is under development. Age structure of farm managers by gender Methodology (C.23)
Even though the CAP considers someone a young farmer when the person is below 40 years, EUROSTAT, up to 2013, split up the age class at 35 years. Romania has one of the lowest shares of young farmers in the total number of farm managers (3.1% versus an EU average of 5.1% in 2016). Moreover, this share is decreasing (both at Romanian and EU level) since 2010. Also the ratio of young managers to elderly is decreasing.
The ratio of young female managers to young male managers is about 1:3.
Share of farm managers <35 years by gender 8.0% 0.14 0.12 6.0% 0.10 0.08 4.0% 0.06
2.0% 0.04 0.02 0.0% 0.00 2005 2007 2010 2013 2016 Share of male farm managers below 35 years share of female farm managers <35 years Share of farm managers below 35 years - EU-28 ratio < 35 y.o./>= 55 y.o. (right axis)
Source: EUROSTAT
Agricultural training of farm managers Methodology (C.24)
The share of farm managers below 35 years of age with a basic or full agricultural training is higher than in the total farm managers population in Romania. The share of young farm managers with agricultural training in Romania is much lower compared to the EU average. Agricultural training of farm managers below 35 years 100% 100% Managers < 35 years with full 80% 80% agricultural training Managers < 35 years with basic 60% 60% agricultural training 40% 40% Managers < 35 years with full agricultural training - EU-28 20% 20% Managers < 35 years with basic 0% 0% agricultural training - EU-28 2005 2010 2013 2016 Source: DG AGRI - EUROSTAT
Economic farm size by age class The average economic farm size in Romania is the highest in the age class of 25 to 34 years old. This age class is the one which has registered the faster growth in terms of average economic size. Average economic farm size in Standard output in EUR 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 - < 25 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 64 years >= 65 years 2007 2010 2013 2016 Source: DG AGRI - EUROSTAT
15 PROMOTE EMPLOYMENT, GROWTH, SOCIAL INCLUSION AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL AREAS, INCLUDING BIO- ECONOMY AND SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY More information on this specific objective is available in the brief on jobs and growth in rural areas Contributing to jobs in rural areas Evolution of the employment rate in predominantly rural areas Methodology (I.14)
After some years of decline, the employment rate in Romania is slightly increasing since 2011, reaching 69% in 2017. Nevertheless, it is below the maximum level registered at the beginning of the observed period (74% in 1997). The employment rate in predominantly rural areas in Romania (67.7%) is below the EU-average rural employment rate (72.6% in 2017).
N.B.: the employment rate for women is for the total population of women. 75.0% 73.0% 71.0% 69.0% 67.0% 65.0% 63.0% 61.0% 59.0% 57.0% 55.0% 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Employment rate for the age group 20-64 in rural areas Employment rate for the age group 20-64 females Employment rate for the age group 20-64 total Employment rate for the age group 20-64 in rural areas - EU-28
Source: EUROSTAT
Contributing to growth in rural areas Evolution of GDP per head in predominantly rural areas Methodology (I.16)
Under the objective of balanced territorial development, the CAP aims to reduce the gap in standard of living between rural and other areas in the EU. GDP per capita, corrected for purchasing power, can be used to compare the aggregate standard of living between different geographical entities. The following graph shows that the GDP per capita in Romania is below the EU average (the level being 58% in 2016). As concerns rural regions, the GDP per capita is even lower (38% of the EU average GDP per capita in 2015). After a period of growth, the GDP per capita in rural regions has been relatively stable since 2008. The gap between the GDP per capita in rural regions in Romania versus the national average is increasing (in 2006, 18 index points).
GDP per capita (index PPS [EU-28 = 100]) 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 - 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
GDP per capita in rural regions Total GDP per capita GDP per capita in rural regions - EU-28
Source: EUROSTAT View here the related dashboard on jobs and growth in rural areas
16 A fairer CAP The impact indicator 'Improve the distribution of CAP support' is currently under development.
In 2015, 20% of the beneficiaries received 84% of direct payments in Romania. This is in line the EU-average. Payments are slightly more concentrated than land in Romania. distribution of direct aid by aid amount in EUR 70.00% 60.00% beneficiaries expenditure 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%
Source: CATS data FY2017 See page 9 for a comparison by MS
Promoting rural inclusion Evolution of poverty index in rural areas Methodology (I.15)
The rural poverty rate in Romania is around 48.5% in 2017 and is above the EU-average poverty rate in rural areas (24%). Rural areas in Romania have a higher poverty rate than the average of the country. Both total poverty rate and rural poverty rate in Romania have registered an increase in 2016, but decrease again in 2017.
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Poverty rate in rural areas (% of total population) Total poverty rate (% of total population) Poverty rate in rural areas (% of total population) - EU-28 Total poverty rate (% of total population) - EU-28 Source: EUROSTAT Click here for a comparison across MS
Tourism infrastructure Methodology (C.30)
The total number of bed places in Romania increased between 2012 and 2017 by 19%. The majority of bed places are located in intermediate areas. The number of bed places increased in all types of areas. The biggest relative increase was registered in rural areas (+34% between 2012 and 2017).
total number of bed places by type of regions 400 000 350 000 300 000 250 000 200 000 150 000 100 000 50 000 - 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 rural areas intermediate areas urban areas
Source: EUROSTAT
17 IMPROVE THE RESPONSE OF EU AGRICULTURE TO SOCIETAL DEMANDS ON FOOD AND HEALTH, INCLUDING SAFE, NUTRITIOUS AND SUSTAINABLE FOOD, AS WELL AS ANIMAL WELFARE Find here the brief for CAP Specific Objective 9 about health, food and antimicrobial resistance
Limiting antibiotic use in agriculture Sales/use in food producing animals
The sales in veterinary antimicrobial agents in mg per population correction unit (PCU) are below the EU average (which is weighted for those MS that provide data on a yearly basis). Romania does not have yet a long data series.
Sales, in mg/PCU of active ingredient, of veterinary antimicrobial agents marketed mainly for food-producing animals RO EU-28 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption (ESVAC)
Sustainable use of pesticides Reduce risks and impacts of pesticides
The new indicator will provide information that is weighted based on the actual risk of the active ingredient to provide information about the risks to humans and the environment. The following graph provides only information about the sales of plant protection products (PPP). For some MS and for some years there is no data for some of the different PPPs. Therefore, the graph cannot provide the trend in sales at EU-level.
Sales of plant protection products in kilogrammes
Romania provided data for all different categories of pesticides each year. After a decreasing trend, an increase of sales was registered in 2015 and 2017, in particular as far as the main category of PPP is concerned: herbicides, haulm destructors and moss killers. Fungicides and bactericides have increased over the analysed period.
Sales of plant protection products in kilogrammes 14 000 000 Other plant protection products 12 000 000 Plant growth regulators 10 000 000
8 000 000 Molluscicides
6 000 000 Insecticides and acaricides 4 000 000 Herbicides. haulm destructors and moss 2 000 000 killers Fungicides and bactericides 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: EUROSTAT
18 Farming intensity Methodology (C.33)
Farming intensity in the graph below is defined as the level of inputs used by the farm per hectare of land. The inputs considered are fertilizers, pesticides, other crop protection products and purchased feed. The thresholds have been set in such a way that the UAA in the EU is equally divided into the three categories for the first year of the analysis (2004 for the EU-25) - > EUR 342 constant per ha for the highest category, < EUR 150 constant per ha for the lowest category. These levels do not pretend to represent any real borders of extensive and intensive farming. They are set in a pragmatic way to study developments in farming intensity over time.
In Romania, the area with low input intensity per hectare has decreased between 2007 and 2016, from 44% to 69%, whereas to area with medium input intensity has decreased, from 40% to 23% in 2016.
UAA managed by farms according to input intensity per hectare 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 low input intensity per hectare medium input intensity per hectare high input intensity per hectare
Source: DG AGRI - FADN and EUROSTAT
Responding to consumer demand for quality food Currently, no data is available for the indicator 'Value of production under EU quality schemes (incl. organics)'. Area under organic farming Methodology (C.19)
The total area under organic farming is decreasing in Romania between 2012 and 2017, although it increase again in 2017 compared to the previous year, covering about 260 000 hectares in 2017. With 1.9% of the total utilized agricultural area under organic farming in 2017, Romania is below the average EU share of agricultural land under organic farming (which was 7% in 2017).
Total area under organic farming 350 000 8.0%
300 000 7.0% 6.0% 250 000 5.0% 200 000 4.0% 150 000 3.0% 100 000 2.0% 50 000 1.0% - 0.0% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total agricultural area under organic farming (under conversion) Total agricultural area under organic farming (certified area) Share of area under organic farming out of total UAA (certified plus under conversion) EU-28 Share of area under organic farming out of total UAA (certified plus under conversion)
Source: EUROSTAT
Find more information about organic production and a comparison between MS in the related dashboard
19 FOSTERING KNOWLEDGE, INNOVATION AND DIGITALISATION IN AGRICULTURE
Sharing knowledge and innovation Share of CAP budget for knowledge sharing and innovation
Under the programming period 2014-2020, Romania programmed 1.2% of their total rural development envelope (EAFRD + national contribution) under M01: knowledge transfer and information actions, M02: advisory services, farm management and farm relief services and M16: Co-operation-EIP. This is below the EU-28 average of 3.6%.
% RD budget programmed for cooperation-EIP, knowledge transfer and advisory services, period 2014-2020 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3.63% 3% 2% 1% 0% BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES FR HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK % of RD envelope programmed for M01+M02+M16 EU-28 average
Source: MS notification in SFC (based on adopted programmes up to July 2019)
Number of EIP operational groups per MS
The European Innovation Platform for agricultural productivity and sustainability (EIP-AGRI) contains EIP operational groups (OG) that are set-up by interested actors such as farmers, researchers, advisors and businesses involved in the agricultural and food sector. The OG come together to work on concrete, practical solutions to a problem or innovative opportunity and whose project is funded by the EAFRD. The figures in the graph are the number of OGs officially submitted by the management authority to the Commission. number of Operational Groups 200 176 153 143 150 134 115 100 74 39 50 30 23 14 13 10 10 9 8 6 5 0 IT ES DE NL PT FR UK SE IE LV AT BE PL SI FI CZ LT BG CY DK EE EL HR HU LU MT RO SK
Source: DG AGRI (updated till 07-2019) Find here an overview of the operational groups and geographical coverage
Agricultural training of farm managers Methodology (C.24)
In Romania, only 3% of the total farm managers attained basic or full agricultural training in 2016. This share has decreased over time (7% in 2005). The share of farmers that attained full agricultural training (meaning any training course continuing for the equivalent of at least two years full time training after the end of compulsory education and completed at an agricultural college, university or other institute of higher education in agriculture) is zero, i. e. the lowest in the EU.
Agricultural training of farm managers 100% 100% Managers with full agricultural training 75% 75% Managers with basic agricultural training 50% 50% Managers with full agricultural 25% 25% training - EU-28 Managers with basic 0% 0% agricultural training - EU-28 2005 2010 2013 2016
Source: DG AGRI - EUROSTAT
20 Methodology
This factsheet provides an overview of the current state of the agricultural sector and rural development in the Member State based on a common set of indicators. The factsheet follows the order of the nine specific objectives and includes the impact indicators that are in Annex I of the CAP Strategic Plan proposal. It includes the context indicators in the new Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (PMEF) for which data is available to date.
The name of the impact indicators that are in the new PMEF, are in bold. The description of the impact indicator is given below the name.
For example: Sharing knowledge and innovation Share of CAP budget for knowledge sharing and innovation
Indicators that are not impact indicators in the new PMEF are used as a proxy in case the new impact indicator is still under development. Additional data is presented in graphs where this is relevant and available. These indicator names are shown in italics and surrounded by a light grey box.
For example: Agricultural training of farm managers
All impact indicators are also context indicators in the existing Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) and the future PMEF. The table of contents provides a link to the methodological fiches of the impact and context indicators that already exist in the current CMEF. It is possible that some of these fiches will be updated for the PMEF. The table also indicates which indicators are already in the CMEF and which indicators are proposed as impact indicators in the new PMEF.
Complementary information
This factsheet is different from a number of other fiches and factsheets that are available on the EUROPA website. These factsheets provide an analysis per MS as regards the evolution of the different indicators over a long time period following the order of the specific objectives and, therefore, allowing a comparison with the trend in the EU.
The factsheets are complementary to the CAP dashboards that are grouped by theme and focus on the results that are achieved by the CAP in a dynamic IT tool. A number of graphs in these factsheets are similar to the ones in the CAP dashboards, but provide longer time series:
Here you can access the different CAP indicator dashboards
The statistical factsheets published on the EUROPA website present the main economic and agricultural data for each country and the European Union: key data, population and economy, CAP expenditure and distribution of direct aids, agricultural input, output and income, agricultural labour input, agricultural prices, agricultural trade and farm structure:
https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/statistics/factsheets_en
21 Abbreviations
AECM Agri-environment-climate measures AIR Annual implementation report AL Arable land ANC Areas with natural constraints AWU Annual working unit CAP Common Agricultural Policy CATS Clearance of accounts Audit Trailing System CMEF Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework COP Cereals, Oilseed and Protein crops DG AGRI Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development DG ENV Directorate-General for Environment EAFRD European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development EEA European Environment Agency EBB European Biodiesel Board EBCC European Bird Census Council EIP-AGRI European Innovation Platform for agricultural productivity and sustainability ESVAC European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption EU European Union FADN Farm Accountancy Data Network FNVA Farm Net Value Added FY Financial Year GDP Gross Domestic Product GHG Greenhouse gasses GNB Gross Nutrient Balance JRC Joint Research Center LFA Less Favoured Areas LU Livestock Unit LUCAS Land use and land cover survey MS Member State NEC National Emission Ceilings NUTS Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics OG Operational Groups PC Permanent Crops PCU Population correction unit PECBMS Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme PG Permanent grassland PMEF Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Framework PPP Plant protection products PPS Purchasing Power Standard RD Rural Development RE renewable energy SFC System for Fund Management in the European Union TFP Total Factor Productivity toe tonnes of oil equivalent UAA Utilised Agricultural Area
22