INTEGRATED CROP MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS in the EU Amended Final Report for European Commission DG Environment Submitted by Agra CEAS Consulting THIS REPORT IS AN AMENDED VERSION OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED TO DG ENVIRONMENT IN MARCH 2002 Telephone: *44 (0)1233 812181 Fax: *44 (0)1233 813309 E-mail: [email protected] www.ceasc.com 1882/BDB/May 2002 INTEGRATED CROP MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE EU S1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... V 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. REPORT STRUCTURE ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. BACKGROUND TO ICM SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................ 3 3. DEFINITIONS OF ICM SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................... 7 3.1. THE ICM ‘CONCEPT’ .................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2. WORKING DEFINITIONS............................................................................................................................... 11 3.3. POSITIONING RELATIVE TO CONVENTIONAL AND ORGANIC PRODUCTION.................................................... 16 4. EU REVIEW OF ICM SYSTEMS................................................................................................................. 21 4.1. BACKGROUND TO RESEARCH SYSTEMS ....................................................................................................... 21 4.2. BACKGROUND TO COMMERCIAL SYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 22 4.2.1. Organisations promoting ICM in Europe........................................................................................... 23 4.2.2. Retailer driven schemes (EUREP)...................................................................................................... 24 4.3. ICM SCHEMES BY MEMBER STATE............................................................................................................. 25 4.3.1. Austria ................................................................................................................................................ 25 4.3.2. Belgium............................................................................................................................................... 26 4.3.3. Denmark ............................................................................................................................................. 27 4.3.4. Finland................................................................................................................................................ 27 4.3.5. France................................................................................................................................................. 28 4.3.6. Germany ............................................................................................................................................. 35 4.3.7. Greece................................................................................................................................................. 43 4.3.8. Ireland ................................................................................................................................................ 43 4.3.9. Italy..................................................................................................................................................... 44 4.3.10. Luxembourg ...................................................................................................................................... 48 4.3.11. Netherlands....................................................................................................................................... 49 4.3.12. Portugal............................................................................................................................................ 51 4.3.13. Spain ................................................................................................................................................. 51 4.3.14. Sweden.............................................................................................................................................. 55 4.3.15. United Kingdom................................................................................................................................ 58 4.3.16. Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 64 5. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ICM SYSTEMS IN THE EU ............................................................. 67 5.1. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 67 5.2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM RESEARCH ICM SYSTEMS........................................................................ 69 5.2.1. Boigneville (France)........................................................................................................................... 69 5.2.2. The Lautenbach project (Germany).................................................................................................... 71 5.2.3. The CAMAR project (Italy)................................................................................................................. 72 5.2.4. Focus on Farming Practice (UK)....................................................................................................... 74 5.2.5. The LIFE project (UK) ....................................................................................................................... 75 5.3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM COMMERCIAL ICM SYSTEMS................................................................... 76 5.3.1. Champagne (France).......................................................................................................................... 76 5.3.2. The AKIL project (Germany).............................................................................................................. 77 5.3.3. Chianti (Italy) ..................................................................................................................................... 79 5.3.4. Citrus production (Spain) ................................................................................................................... 81 i INTEGRATED CROP MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE EU 5.3.5. Pome fruit production (Spain) ............................................................................................................ 82 5.4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM NON-CASE STUDY ICM SYSTEMS............................................................. 83 5.4.1. Lanxade (France) ............................................................................................................................... 83 5.4.2. INTEX (Germany)............................................................................................................................... 84 5.4.3. Nagele (Netherlands).......................................................................................................................... 85 5.4.4. Nagele, Vredepeel and Borgerswold (Netherlands) ........................................................................... 86 5.4.5. Logården (Sweden)............................................................................................................................. 87 5.4.6. Boxworth (UK).................................................................................................................................... 88 5.4.7. SCARAB/TALISMAN (UK) ................................................................................................................. 89 5.4.8. LINK- IFS (UK) .................................................................................................................................. 90 6. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ICM SYSTEMS IN THE EU........................................................................... 93 6.1. ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM RESEARCH ICM SYSTEMS .................................................................................. 93 6.1.1. Boigneville (France)........................................................................................................................... 93 6.1.2. The Lautenbach project (Germany).................................................................................................... 93 6.1.3. The CAMAR project (Italy)................................................................................................................. 94 6.1.4. Focus on Farming Practice (UK)....................................................................................................... 94 6.1.5. The LIFE project (UK) ....................................................................................................................... 95 6.2. ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM COMMERCIAL ICM SYSTEMS.............................................................................. 96 6.2.1. Champagne (France).........................................................................................................................