EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52012DC0358
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 2006-2010 report on the implementation of the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in the northern regions of Finland and Sweden pursuant to Commission Decisions 2009/3067 and 2010/6050
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 2006-2010 report on the implementation of the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in the northern regions of Finland and Sweden pursuant to Commission Decisions 2009/3067 and 2010/6050
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 2006-2010 report on the implementation of the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in the northern regions of Finland and Sweden pursuant to Commission Decisions 2009/3067 and 2010/6050
/* COM/2012/0358 final */
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 2006-2010 report on the implementation of the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in the northern regions of Finland and Sweden pursuant to Commission Decisions 2009/3067 and 2010/6050 /* COM/2012/0358 final */
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
COUNCIL 2006-2010 report
on the implementation of the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in
the northern regions of Finland and Sweden pursuant to Commission Decisions
2009/3067 and 2010/6050 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1........... INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 3 2........... GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE NORDIC
AID....................................................... 3 2.1........ Objectives of the Aid...................................................................................................... 3 2.2........ Commission authorisations.............................................................................................. 3 2.3........ Regions covered by aid................................................................................................... 4 2.4........ Relation with the production............................................................................................ 4 3........... RECENT EVOLUTIONS OF THE NORDIC
AID SCHEME...................................... 5 3.1........ Evaluation of the Aid scheme.......................................................................................... 5 3.2........ Reform of the Aid schemes............................................................................................. 5 4........... NORDIC AID IN FINLAND 2006-2010..................................................................... 6 4.1........ Authorisations granted.................................................................................................... 6 4.2........ Aid disbursed................................................................................................................. 7 4.3........ Production volumes in the Nordic
aid area....................................................................... 7 4.4........ Development of the agricultural
economy in the Nordic aid region.................................. 10 5........... NORDIC AID IN SWEDEN 2006-2010.................................................................... 11 5.1........ Authorisations granted.................................................................................................. 11 5.2........ Aid disbursed............................................................................................................... 11 5.3........ Production volumes in the Aid
area............................................................................... 12 5.4........ Development of the agricultural
economy in the Aid region............................................. 13 6........... CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................ 13 6.1........ Finland......................................................................................................................... 13 6.2........ Sweden........................................................................................................................ 14 1. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Article 142 of the Act of
Accession to the European Union of Austria, Finland and Sweden[1], the Commission has authorised
Finland and Sweden to grant long-term national aid to agriculture in the
northern regions, in order to maintain agricultural activity. This aid is
referred to as the Nordic aid ("the Aid"). The present report is submitted to the
Council in compliance with the reporting requirement of Article 143 of the Act
of Accession, where it is laid down that the Commission shall submit every
fifth year a report on the authorisations granted and the results of the aid
granted under such authorisations. Previous reports were made in 1996, 2002[2], and 2007[3]. 2. GENERAL
PRINCIPLES OF THE NORDIC AID 2.1. Objectives
of the Aid The Aid is granted in particular to maintain
traditional primary production and processing naturally suited to the climatic
conditions of the regions concerned, to improve structures for the production,
marketing and processing of agricultural products, to facilitate the disposal
of such products, and to ensure that the environment is protected and the
countryside preserved. 2.2. Commission
authorisations The Aid is authorised by separate
Commission Decisions for Finland and Sweden respectively. The basic conditions are fixed in Article
142 of the Act of Accession; the total amount of the aid granted should be
sufficient to maintain agricultural activity in the northern areas but may not
lead to overall support exceeding the level of support during a pre-accession
reference period, defined in the authorisations. Also, aid may not be linked to
future production or bring about an increase in production, in relation to
reference levels. The first Decision concerning Finland was
adopted in 1995 (95/196/EC[4]),
recast by Decision 2002/404/EC[5],
and by Decision C(2009)3067. The maximum payment authorised is currently EUR
358 million/year. The first Decision concerning Sweden was
adopted in 1996 (96/228/EC[6])
and recast by Decision C(2010)6050. The maximum annual payment authorised is
SEK 318.67 million (approx. EUR 35.41 million: the exchange rate used in this
report is 9.0 SEK/EUR). 2.3. Regions
covered by aid The regions covered by the Aid scheme are
defined in the respective Decisions and are situated north of the 62nd parallel
and some adjacent areas south of the parallel affected by comparable climatic
conditions rendering agricultural activity particularly difficult. The factors
taken into consideration when determining the areas are low population density
(max 10 inhabitants/km2), Utilised Agricultural Area (UAA) as a
proportion of the total area (<10%), agricultural area used for the
cultivation of crops intended for human consumption as a proportion of UAA (≤
20%), and municipalities surrounded by others within before mentioned areas
(even where they do not satisfy the same requirements). In Finland, the current Aid area covers 1
417 140 hectares (ha) of UAA (55.5% of total UAA) and in Sweden 335 676 ha of
UAA (11 % of total UAA[7]). Figure
1: Finnish (C1-C4) and Swedish (1-3) support areas. 2.4. Relation
with the production The Aid is limited to specific agricultural
sectors, as defined for each Member State in the respective Decision. The Aid is granted on the basis of
production units, either livestock units (LU) or ha, with the exception of
support to and transport of milk, where the quantities delivered and
transported are supported. The Finnish aid to reindeer is on a per animal
basis. As stated above, aid may not be linked to
future production or bring about an increase in production in relation to a
reference period. Reference periods are stipulated in the respective Decision
for each Member State per sector. The reference quantity for milk production in
Finland has several times been aligned with CAP related developments in the
milk sector. However, the 2009-2010 review of the Finnish and Swedish Aid
schemes removed the link between individual CAP milk quotas and the aid
payments. Instead, it introduced a restriction not to pay such aid for the
quantity of milk in the region subject to surplus levy under the milk quota
system. 3. RECENT
EVOLUTIONS OF THE NORDIC AID SCHEME 3.1. Evaluation
of the Aid scheme After more than 10 years of application,
the Commission launched an evaluation of the Aid scheme, which was finalised in
2007[8]. The evaluation analysed to
what extent the objectives of the schemes had been met, potential side effects,
if the instruments were still adequate and justified, and the effectiveness,
efficiency and relevance of the Aid. The results of the evaluation suggest that
the Aid schemes: ·
have contributed to maintaining the agricultural
activities, production and land use in the regions concerned; ·
are still necessary in order to meet the
objectives of Article 142 of maintaining agricultural activity in the regions
concerned and therefore remain relevant; ·
could be reformed (simplified). Based on the recommendations of the
evaluation and the developments of production, both Member States proposed to
review their respective schemes. 3.2. Reform
of the Aid schemes The review of the Decisions aimed at
simplifying the schemes, and aligning the authorisations with the objectives of
the Act of Accession. As regards simplification, the recasts
finalised in 2009 and 2010 regrouped different production sectors and specified
the maximum average aid rates for the entire Finnish and Swedish aid areas,
respectively. Previously, the Decisions differentiated the aid between regions
and per production unit. In this context, the national authorities were
mandated to identify the specific conditions and detailed criteria, based on
the degree of natural handicap, for differentiating the aid amounts. The
objective criteria relating to the severity of the natural handicaps have been
communicated to the Commission by both countries. In relation to aligning the authorisations
with the objectives set in the Act of Accession, the review of production and
payment authorisations revealed that in the Finnish Aid area, production had in
general been maintained, even though a certain shift southwards within the area
had occurred. In some sectors, particularly pigs and poultry, production had
however increased substantially, partly due to the Aid. This, together with
developments in the other payments to the Aid area led to a reduction of the
maximum annual payment authorisation for Finland from EUR 448.59 million to 358
million. Also, aid to the pig and poultry sectors was decoupled from the type
of production. The review further revealed that in the
Swedish Aid area, production levels had been decreasing - especially in the
milk sector, which is the main sector supported. This indicated failure to
achieve the goals of Article 142 of maintaining agricultural production.
Therefore, based on the proposal by the Swedish authorities, the revision of
the Decision finalised in 2010 allows for concentrating the aid to the
remaining production to stop this decline. 4. NORDIC
AID IN FINLAND 2006-2010 4.1. Authorisations
granted At the beginning of the five-year period,
Decision C(2002)404 authorised Finland to annually pay total aid of EUR 448.59
million. The Decision specified aid and production factors permitted per
sub-region (not shown). Decision C(2009)3067 (amended by Decision C(2009)9122)
applied from 1 January 2009 and authorised aid as shown in Table 1. The provision
concerning milk applies from 1 April 2009 and its provisions concerning
ruminants, horticulture, crop production and other aid applies from 1 January
2010. Table 1: Annual aid authorised according
to Decision C2009/3067/EC || Max average aid allowed / unit || Unit || Max aid allowed (mEUR) || Max number of eligible production factors 1. MILK || 10.9 || cents/kg || 193.7 || 1 776 765 t[9] 2. RUMINANTS || || €/LU || 73.7 || Bovines || 412 || || || 179 160 LU Ewes, she-goats || 533 || || Horses || 277 || || 3. PIGS AND POULTRY[10] || 266 || €/LU || 37.0 || 4. HORTICULTURE || || || 25.4 || Greenhouses || 11.3 || €/m2 || || 202.9 ha Storage of horticultural products || 18.5 || €/m3 || || 5. CROP PRODUCTION || || €/ha || 58.3 || General hectare-based aid || 37 || || || 881 825 ha Aid for certain crops[11] || 145 || || || 62 475 ha Aid for young farmers || 36 || || || 6. OTHER AID || || || 14.9 || Reindeer || 36 || €/animal || || 171 100 animals Compensation for damages caused by carnivores to reindeer herding[12] || || || || Aid for transport of milk and meat || || || || Safeguarding services for livestock || || || || Storage of wild berries, mushrooms || 0.10–0.42 || €/kg || || Other aid[13] || || || || Total || || || 358 || 4.2. Aid
disbursed Nordic aid During the years 2006-2009 the total annual
Aid paid out was approximately EUR 326 million (of EUR 448.59 million
authorised), while it increased to EUR 338 million in 2010 (of EUR 358 million
authorised) (Table 2). Table 2: Nordic aid disbursed in Finland
(mEUR) Sector supported || 2006 || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 Milk || 159 || 159 || 159 || 159 || 161 Ruminants || 65 || 66 || 66 || 68 || 71 Pig, poultry || 36 || 35 || 35 || 33 || 32 Horticulture || 21 || 20 || 21 || 20 || 22 Crop production || 42 || 43 || 42 || 41 || 42 Other aid || 3.5 || 3.7 || 4 || 4.2 || 11 Total || 326.7 || 326.6 || 326.5 || 325.8 || 338.1 In conclusion, the annual Nordic aid
granted in Finland respected the maximum levels set in the Decisions. It should
be noted, that for those sectors where total production exceeded the authorised
number of eligible production factors, a pro-rata reduction of aid per unit of
production factor was applied in order to respect the financial ceiling
authorised by the Decision. Total support in the Nordic aid area Agriculture in the support areas in the Aid
scheme benefits also from instruments financed by the EU, notably the two
pillars under the CAP. Of the second pillar measures, support for less-favoured
areas (LFA) and agri-environmental (AE) measures are of particular importance
for the agricultural sector in the support areas. Decision C 2000/405[14] fixed the maximum ceiling of
total annual support in the Aid area at EUR 1118.9 million (1993 level). Table
3 shows that aid disbursed in the Aid area in the years 2006-2010 according to
the legal basis used, respected the maximum ceiling set in the Decision. Table 3: Summary
of the total annual aid disbursed in Finland, including EU aid (mEUR) Type of aid disbursed || 2006 || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 Direct aid, fully EU financed || 350.3 || 278.9 || 281.3 || 283.8 || 278.5 LFA, including national supplements || 308.7 || 309.1 || 309.5 || 308.9 || 308.1 AE- support || 164.9 || 153.5 || 162.7 || 164.6 || 167.1 Nordic aid[15] || 326.7 || 326.6 || 326.5 || 325.8 || 338.1 Total || 1 150.6[16] || 1 068.1 || 1 080.6 || 1 083.1 || 1 092.6 4.3. Production
volumes in the Nordic aid area Milk sector Almost 80% of the Finnish milk is produced
in the Aid area. The share has been quite stable during the five years, with a
slight overall increase towards the end of the period. However, the production
is concentrated in the C2 area. During the five-year period, the milk
production was highest in the 2006/2007 and lowest in the 2008/2009 marketing
year (1 813 vs. 1 756 thousand tonnes). Production exceeded the set reference
level in three marketing years; in 2006/2007, 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. The
excess in 2010/2011 was in the order of 1.5%. Figure 2:
Development of milk production during the 2006/2007-2010/2011 marketing years
in the Finnish Nordic aid area Ruminants The revised Decision of 2009 authorising
the aid grouped together the production factors for bovines, ewes, she-goats,
and horses. Within this group, bovine production showed an increasing trend,
while production of ewes, she-goats, and horses decreased slightly. Beef production in the Aid region varied
during the five-year period. The 2010 level is about 2% lower than the 2006
level, whereas it fell by 8.8% in the rest of Finland. The number of suckler
cows increased everywhere in Finland, but the greatest growth has been in
region C with 55%. Other ruminants have remained fairly stable during the
2006-2010 period. The overall ruminant production was 173 774 LU in 2010, i.e.
still 3% below the authorised maximum level of supported production. Figure 3:
Development of ruminant production in 2006-2010 in the Finnish Nordic Aid area Pigs and poultry Pig and poultry production had increased
substantially already before this five-year period and exceeded the reference
level by 50-70% during several years. Pork meat production is concentrated in
cereal producing areas in the most southern Aid sub-regions. In 2006 pork
production was 90.9 million kg and continued to increase in subsequent years
reaching 93.6 million kg in 2010. Also poultry production is concentrated in
the most southern Aid areas. The production has grown almost constantly, from
34.6 to 40.4 million kg from 2006- 2010. The aid to this group was decoupled
from production as of 2009, and the aid level was frozen at that of 2007.
Additionally, the Decision provides for an upper limit of production in the
farms receiving decoupled aid fixed at the 2007 level (139 200 LU). Production
in 2010 was 135 066 LU, 97% of the fixed 2007 level. Horticulture Horticulture production is a small niche
production in Finland, with a limited number of greenhouse enterprises. It
accounts for about 6% of the Aid and 72% of the production takes place in
region C1. The annual horticulture production area varied between 207 and 211
ha in the five year period, slightly exceeding the reference level of 203 ha
(by max. 8 ha or 4% of the reference level). Crop production Nordic aid for crop production comprises
"general hectare based aid", "young farmers' aid", and
"aid for certain crops", as defined in the Decision. As regards
"general hectare based aid", the UAA supported in the Aid region has
remained very stable during this five-year period (630 000-650 000 ha),
although the reduction in UAA compared with pre-accession reference level has
been substantial (30%). For "young farmers' aid" there is no maximum
level of eligible production factors set in the Decision and no comparison can
be made. As regards "aid to certain crops", the area covered exceeded
the maximum number of eligible production factors in 2010 by 60%. This
production peak of "certain crops" was due to a change in the market
situation, which led to increased interest for oil seed production in 2010.
Wheat accounts for 35-45% of the production area and remained stable during
this five-year period. Other aid Reindeer production remained fairly stable,
varying from 151 589 to 154 971 animals during the five-year period which is
10% below the maximum number of eligible production factors set in the
Decision. The remaining part of the other aids is not directly linked to
production. Conclusions related to production
volumes In conclusion, total production of the
supported sectors increased in the Aid area during this five-year period, and
it exceeded the maximum number of eligible production factors for milk,
horticulture and "certain crops". This production overrun was minor
for milk and horticulture (1-4% over the period), but substantial for
"certain crops" in 2010 (60%). The reported production increase can
not be allocated to the Aid only, as the aid levels per unit were reduced pro-rata
in those sectors where the maximum number of eligible production factors was
exceeded. 4.4. Development
of the agricultural economy in the Nordic aid region There were 62 300 farms in Finland in 2010
of which 58% in the Aid area; a drop of 9% from 2006 both nationwide and in the
Aid area. The UAA remained the same, while the number of ha/farm increased,
indicating a structural adjustment. The lowest farm size is in the northernmost
Aid region. Preservation of production has been achieved although it appears
more challenging in the northernmost areas, despite the higher aid levels both
for livestock and plant production. The Aid is important for the generation of
farm income in the region; nearly two thirds of farm holders' income derives
from it. The amounts of aid/farm have been increasing, particularly for
livestock production. The reason for this is above all structural development.
The amount of livestock production grew in the north; it accounted for more
than 80% of the agricultural sales revenue. The ratio Nordic aid/farm net value added
(FNVA) varied between 0.41 and 0.52 during 2006-2010. The FNVA per annual work
unit (FNVA/AWU) in the region increased with almost 15% from 2006 to 2007, but
fell again after 2008 to reach in 2010 a level 3% higher than at the start of
the period. In certain parts of the Aid region, the
depopulation has been >4% during the review period, and 76% of
municipalities has experienced a fall in population compared to 44% in southern
Finland. The proportion of jobs in agriculture in the north is more than 3
times that of the south, and has decreased less. Overall there has been a
positive change in employment but jobs are created in the main towns and not in
the more rural areas. Continuation of agricultural production in
the Aid area has maintained many environmental services and the open
agricultural landscape, which is a scarcity in the region. The farmers estimate
that making their activities more environmentally-friendly has been the biggest
change in their activities in recent years. There is a slightly greater
emphasis in the Nordic aid region than in the rest of Finland on measures
affecting pesticides and airborne emissions; in the northernmost region,
diversity and preservation of the landscape are strongly emphasised. 5. NORDIC
AID IN SWEDEN 2006-2010 5.1. Authorisations
granted In the beginning of the five-year period,
Decision 96/228/EC (as amended) authorised Sweden to pay SEK 318.67 million/year
(EUR 35.41 million). The Decision also specified aid and eligible production
factors permitted per sub-region (not shown). From the 1 July 2010, Decision
C(2010)6050 authorises Sweden to pay aid as shown in Table 4 below. Table 4: Aid authorised/year in accordance with Decision C(2010)6050 || Max average aid/unit[17] || Unit || National aid[18] mSEK /year || Max eligible production factors 1. Milk sector || || || 295.67 || 450 000 t – Cows milk || 0.73 || SEK/kg – Goats[19] || 500 || SEK/head – Transport aid cows milk || 0.039 || SEK/kg 2. Pigs, poultry[20] || 1 350 || SEK/LU || 20.97 || 16 532 LU 3. Soft fruit, vegetables || 2 800 || SEK/ha || 2.03 || 750 ha 5.2. Aid
disbursed Nordic aid The total annual amounts paid as Aid varied
between SEK 263.29 - 289.89 million (EUR 29.25-32.21 million) during the period
(Table 5). The aid disbursed had reached its lowest level in 2009, but
increased in 2010 after the revision of the Aid scheme. Table 5: Nordic aid by sector, mSEK Sector supported || 2006 || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 Milk || 274.22 || 257.46 || 249.66 || 248.27 || 264.36 Pigs, poultry || 14.51 || 14.09 || 12.75 || 13.97 || 14.70 Soft fruit, vegetables || 1.16 || 1.12 || 1.14 || 1.05 || 1.04 Total || 289.89 || 272.67 || 263.55 || 263.29 || 280.10 In conclusion, the annual Aid granted in
Sweden always respected the maximum aid allowed by the Decisions. Total support in the Nordic aid area Agriculture in the support areas in the Aid
scheme also benefits from instruments financed by the EU, notably the two
pillars under the CAP (Table 6). Of the second pillar measures, support for
less-favoured areas (LFA) and agri-environmental (AE) measures are of
particular importance. A ceiling of total support to the Aid region is not
fixed in the Decision C(2010)6050. Follow-up of the level of the EU aid is
carried out ex post since 2003. Table 6: Summary of aid disbursed in
Sweden, including Community aid, mSEK Type of aid || 2006 || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 Compensatory payment (LFA) || 299 || 314 || 309 || 302 || 313 Main AE support (open and varied agricultural landscape/ley farming) || 270 || 282 || 278 || 276 || 298 Nordic aid[21] || 290 || 273 || 264 || 263 || 280 Total || 860 || 869 || 850 || 841 || 891 The total combined support varies from year
to year but does not follow a consistent trend and has remained within the same
range since 1997. 5.3. Production
volumes in the Aid area Milk sector The decline in milk production in the Aid
region during the period was 11 % (Figure 4), compared to 8% for the country as
a whole. The steepest decline was in the most southern Aid area, with 20%. The
production is still decreasing, and it is too early to draw any conclusion
whether the revised Aid authorisation will have an effect. The data collected on Aid disbursed to
transport milk from the farms to the first collection point is not accurate
enough to be reported. Figure 4: Milk production (including goat
milk) with support during 2006-2010 in the Swedish Aid area. The reference
level is the maximum number of eligible production factors set in Decision
C(2010)6050 Pig and poultry The production remains fairly stable but
much below the maximum number of eligible production factors of 16 532 LU, and
also lower than the previous 5-year period where the production was at around
13 500 LU. The number of LU receiving support in the pig and poultry sector was
close to 11 500, or around 70% of the maximum. Soft fruit and vegetables The supported number of hectares of soft
fruit and vegetables production decreased from 414 to 376 ha during the period.
The production has fluctuated around these levels during the last 10 years, and
is at only around half of the maximum number of eligible production factors. Conclusions related to production
volumes As regards milk, the production volumes
have been decreasing during the five-year period. The other two sectors remain
fairly stable even though the production varies from year to year. All sectors
are far below the maximum number of eligible production factors. 5.4. Development
of the agricultural economy in the Aid region The Swedish Aid area has low population
density, limitations in the potential for economic developments and poor
conditions for agriculture. The farm structure is characterized by smaller,
more scattered and irregular fields than the average situation in Sweden. This
make costs higher, also for transport within farms due to the distances between
fields. The total agricultural production output
decreased with 10% during the five-year period. The key agricultural product in
the area is milk and the number of producers declined from 1 523 to 1 056; it
more than halved since 2001. The Aid area's share of milk producers in Sweden
has been around 19% while the share of production was 14% which is reflected in
the average number of cows per farm; 45.2 vs. 62.4 in the country as a whole in
2009. The farm income development of the milk farmers shows important
decreases. Slaughter pig production declined during
the period to 67 producers in 2010, only a few remaining in support area 1. The
number of farms receiving support for sows decreased from 74 to 60, although
the number of sows increased with 20%, indicating a structural adjustment. In the Aid area, which is dominated by
forests, the land in agricultural production contributes to keep the landscape
open which favours biodiversity and the scenery. However, the area of land used
for ley farming decreased 12% during the five year period; pastures decreased
by 40%. The agricultural practices in the support areas are characterised by
less intensive production as the main cultivation is grassland and pastures.
These normally rely on a low level use of pesticides and fertilisers. Therefore
the environmental impact is less than from agricultural activities in other
parts of the country. During the period 2000-2009 the support
region's population development was weaker than the rest of the county's, with
a 5.5% decrease in the most rural areas. The number of people employed in agriculture
decreased with 15.2% in the support area from 2000-2008, while the employment
increased in the forestry sector. 6. CONCLUSIONS This report gives an account of the Nordic
aid authorisations granted to Finland and Sweden in the period 2006-2010 and
the results achieved. The report was compiled on the basis of data supplied by
the Member State authorities in compliance with Article 143(2) of the Act of
Accession. 6.1. Finland As regards the implementation of the
Finnish Nordic aid scheme, the Commission notes that: 1. Compliance with the
maximum aid allowed by the Commission authorisations: the total amounts of
Aid paid out, and total support in the Nordic aid area during the period
2006-2010, respected the maximum allowable aid authorised and the reference
levels defined in the respective Commission Decisions C(2009)3067 and
2002/404/EC. 2. Conformity with the
maximum number of eligible production factors: total production in the Aid
area exceeded the maximum number of eligible production factors for milk,
horticulture and "certain crops". To avoid exceeding the respective
total amounts of authorised payments, Finland applied a pro-rata
reduction of the payment per unit of production factor. While this system
ensured that the obligation of the country concerning the maximum total amounts
of paid-out aid was always respected, it did not prevent extending the aid,
even though at a reduced level, to all production. 3. Achievement of the
objectives of the aid scheme: generally speaking, Nordic aid in Finland has
contributed to maintaining production levels in the area. However, as total
production increased in some of the supported sectors, and a shift southward
within the Nordic aid area was observed, implementation of the scheme and the
criteria applied to differentiate the Aid should be closely monitored. 6.2. Sweden As regards the implementation of the
Swedish Nordic aid scheme, the Commission notes that: 1. Compliance with the
maximum aid allowed by the Commission authorisations: the total amounts of
Nordic aid paid out during the period 2006-2010 have respected the ceiling set
for the maximum allowable aid authorised in the Commission Decisions 96/228/EC
and C(2010)6050. 2. Conformity with the
maximum number of eligible production factors: the maximum number of
eligible production factors receiving aid was generally respected in all
sectors receiving Nordic aid. 3. Achievement of the
objectives of the aid scheme: the Aid disbursed in Sweden has not
maintained production levels. The revised Decision C(2010)6050 could contribute
to reversing this trend, but it is too early to conclude on the effects. For both countries, the continuation of
agricultural production contributes to maintain an open, well-managed
agricultural landscape in the forest dominated Nordic aid area. Keeping the
landscape open is positive for biodiversity and the general impression of the
landscape. On the basis of the information provided by the national
authorities, the Commission considers that in general the authorities have applied
Decision 2002/404/EC and Decision C(2009)3067, concerning Finland, and Decision
96/228/EC and C(2010)6050, concerning Sweden, on aid to northern regions in a
satisfactory manner. [1] OJ C 241 of 29.08.1994 [2] Finland COM(2002) 102 of 25.02.2002, Sweden COM(2002)
105 of 01.03.2002 [3] Finland COM(2007) 459 of 31.7.2007, Sweden COM(2007)
416 of 31.7.2007 [4] OJ L 126, 9.6.1995, p. 35 [5] OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p.38 [6] OJ L 76, 26.3.1996, p.29 [7] Due to changes in the definition of UAA this figure
has decreased from previous report. [8] http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/nordic/index_en.htm [9] In marketing year [10] Decoupled aid. Reference quantity ≤ 139 200 LU's [11] Cereals (except barley, oats, mixed cereals), oilseed,
other oil crops, protein, fibre crops. Sugar beets, starch potatoes, apples in
regions C1, C2, C2 north. Field vegetables in regions C1–C4. [12] Maximum Aid allowed 5 mEUR [13] Skolts, natural livelihoods, reindeer husbandry [14] OJ L 154, 27.6.2000, p.23 [15] Reference level 448.59 mEUR until 2008, 358 mEUR from
January 1, 2009 [16] During the 2006 calendar year, direct aid was paid for
years 2005 and 2006 [17] Aid/unit may be differentiated by region within the
limits of the maximum average [18] Max aid allowed: 318.67 mSEK [19] Goats for milk production (~ 800 kg milk/goat/year) [20] 1 laying hen = 0.01, sow = 0.33, 1 slaughter pig = 0.10
LU [21] Reference level: 318.67 mSEK