Initial approaches and evolution towards ‘environmentalisation’ and rural development

In the turbulent economic, political and social scenario of the 80s of the last century, the then European Economic Community began an important process of reforms to the CAP, induced in some way by the explosion of the world agricultural crisis and the international market dispute and prices. Throughout this decade and the beginning of the next, the CAP will redefine the role of agriculture, rural areas and peasants in the context of European economic development, since then shaping an orientation towards market and price control obviously, but also towards agro-environmentalization, diversification and multifunctionality of rural areas.

In the history of the evolution of European environmental policy, the following events stand out: a) in 1990 the European Environment Agency (EEA) was created, with headquarters in Copenhagen; b) in 1992 the Natura 2000 Program was created, financed through the LIFE Program, a political instrument for defining the network of natural protected areas, nature conservation and environmental protection; c) the 1993 Maastrich Treaty gives the environment an official character in the programs of the European Union; d) the Amsterdam Treaty, 1999, establishes the obligation to integrate environmental protection in all sectoral policies of the European Union in order to promote sustainable development; e) in 2000, the White Paper on Environmental Responsibility was presented, which establishes the principle “who pollutes pays”; and f) The Lisbon Treaty in 2009, sets out the commitment to fight against climate change.

In 2013, the Council and the European Parliament adopted the seventh Environment action program valid until 2020. The document entitled ‘living well, respecting the limits of our planet’, establishes nine priority objectives, among those that stand out: the protection of nature; greater ecological resistance; sustainable and efficient growth in the use of resources and low carbon; the fight against health threats related to the environment (^{Diario Oficial de la Union Europea, 2013}). The variable of environmental care in the policies of the European Union has not been limited to the biological or ecological ambit per se, but has gradually been integrated into the CAP, as shown in Table 1.

This chronology reflects how the productivist vision of agriculture is gradually turning towards the environmental component. As pointed out by ^{Sumpsi et al. (1997}), in the Green Paper of 1985 ‘which represents the position of the CAP towards the year 2000, the need for the inclusion of environmental issues was raised for the first time and conservation was recognized as one of the functions of agriculture of the natural environment’. Another noteworthy element in this story is the appearance of the LEADER program aimed at promoting rural development, which, from the European perspective, has a different sense of agricultural-productive development.

The environmental orientation of the common agricultural policy

With little success in its results, the environmental aspect of agriculture is introduced in the CAP; through the structural agrarian policy of the 70s, for example, directive 159/72 on the cessation of agricultural activity and 161/72 on vocational training for farmers (^{Garrido, 2000}), but it is until the 1980s that the environmental aspect will figure more clearly in the approaches and objectives of the CAP.

The Green Paper of 1985 condenses the expression for environmental concerns and EEC 797/85 regulation is the instrument where the legal provision of such inclusion is embodied ^{Garrido (2000)} other regulations designed for environmental care are, for example, EEC 787/85 which talks about improving the efficiency of agrarian structures and article 21 of this regulation that establishes for the first time a system of aid for afforestation of agricultural areas and conservation of forest masses on farms ^{Sumpsi et al. (1997)}. Another legal instrument established in the CAP is Regulation EEC 2328/91 (^{Diario Oficial de la Comunidad Europea, 1991}), where it is made clear as one of its objectives and therefore objective of the Community structural policy, the contribution to the protection of the environment and the maintenance of rural areas, including the sustainable conservation of natural resources in agriculture.

Another important measure towards consolidating the environmental orientation of the CAP is the one referring to the FEDER, FSE and FEOGA-O structural funds that were reformed in 1988 in order to more openly introduce the environmental issue in common agricultural policies. This reform gives the FEOGA-O the function of ‘contributing to the social fabric of rural areas, to the protection of the environment, to the conservation of rural areas (including the natural resources of agriculture) and to offset the effects they have natural obstacles to agriculture’ (^{Garrido, 2000}). In 2003 the European Fund for Agriculture and Rural Development (FEADER) was created and the FEOGA was modified, which became FEGA aimed at financing market policy, the first pillar of the CAP.

It should be emphasized, however, that it is in the 1992 reform that its environmental orientation is defined through the agri-environmental action considered as accompanying action. Regulation 2078/92 called ‘agrarian production methods compatible with the requirements of environmental protection and the conservation of the natural space’, established since then the objective that agriculture acquire more environmentally friendly practices.

The administrative operation to support farmers who agree to take advantage of this agro-environmental program is also unique since ‘an individualized contracting system is established between the farmer and the public authorities: the farmer accepts some commitments regarding the type of practices to be carried out in his exploitation in exchange for receiving economic aid from public funds to compensate for the lower profitability that the option for sustainable agriculture could cause’ (^{Garrido, 2000}).

These aids would only be used to compensate the measures that have positive effects for the environment in the following aspects: reduction in the use of fertilizers and plant protection products, keep the reductions already started or introduce and maintain organic farming methods, extend the productions plants, including forage or transforming arable land into extensive rangeland, reducing cattle and sheep herd, raising endangered local breed animals, keeping farmland or farmland removed from production in good condition, removing from producing farmland for at least 20 years to build biotope reserves, nature parks or to protect waters, include measures to improve farmers' training in environmentally friendly production practices.

Food production and the social and cultural reproduction of the rural population are practically subordinated to the conservation of natural resources. The economic loss that means abandoning or subordinating the agricultural activity for the conservation of the ecosystem is compensated by the European Union; through a series of incentives, subsidies or financial aid, as previously indicated. To exemplify the type of programs and number of subsidies, Table 2 presents the case of the town of Villafafila (Castilla and Leon, Spain), considered paradigmatic regarding the application of agri-environmental action. ^{Paniagua (1999)} indicates that for 1999, Spain is the country with the largest number of these programs (66) in the entire European Union.

For the calculation of the annual aid, 45 hectares are established as the minimum unit for agro-environmental cultivation (UMCA) for the total area received. Up to double the UMCA, 100% of the aid is received, for the area greater than double the UMCA and up to four times, 60% of the amount, for the area greater than four times the UMCA, 30% of the amount. The difference between the economic supports granted lies in environmental criteria, for example, alfalfa had greater economic support since its cultivation is considered important for biological diversity and for being part of the habitat of the bustard, an endangered species. Source: own elaboration based on: order AYG/1111/2010, of July 23, 2007-2013 programming period (^{Boletin Oficial de Castilla y Leon, Nº 149}).

Rural development as the second pillar of the common agricultural policy

The emergence of rural development as the second pillar of the CAP runs parallel to the process of agro-environmentalization -an action to accompany the CAP-. Even, ^{Colino-Sueiras and Martínez-Paz (2005)} would affirm, their antecedents would be found since the Treaty of Rome and subsequent reforms and conferences in which the emphasis has been transferred from the sectorial to the territorial.

It is important to note that in the document “the future of the rural world”, problems such as the detriment of the environment, the rural decline -understood as the emigration of the young population to the cities with the consequent aging process- and thirdly, are identified instead, the problem of marginalized areas, especially mountain agriculture, threatened by agrarian decline and depopulation.

This diagnosis determines that the orientation of rural development is concretized in a “non-agrarian” sense contained in the programs of the Community Initiatives such as: Urban, Interreg and LEADER. Initiatives conceived, according to ^{Molinero and Alario (1994)} ‘as the way to encourage rural development at the county level through endogenous initiatives aimed at promoting the aspects that are now considered fundamental: tourism (45% of the budget), crafts (21%), agricultural activities alternative to traditional, environmental conservation, among others, with priority given to those that provide innovative solutions, diversify the regional economic base and provide alternatives to classic agricultural activities’. Although there is almost general recognition of the success of this program, ^{Sancho (2002)} indicates that the question of the participation of rural society should be taken into account rather than focus on economic benefits, ‘since it would be where the initiative LEADER would leave more to be desired’.

In this way, the LEADER, which can be considered as the first implementation of a rural policy of a territorial nature, integrated and participatory, is intended to sustain and develop local rural development initiatives whose specific features are summarized in seven points: 1) The territorial approach, which involves relying on the particular resources of each region, in order to better respond to local needs; 2) The bottom-up approach in the search for solutions and decision-making, with the aim of granting the greatest possible prominence to local agents; 3) The local action group as a form of horizontal cooperation, grouping representative local and regional agents and institutions; 4) The innovative character of the actions promoted by the beneficiaries with respect to other interventions in the affected rural area; 5) The integral and intersectoral approach, when considering jointly the potential of the different sectors of the economy, society and local resources; 6) The decentralization of management and financing, through local action groups; and 7) Network organization and transnational cooperation, not only for the exchange of knowledge, experiences and results, but also through association in common projects with groups from other countries (^{Colino-Sueiras and Martínez-Paz, 2005}).

The European Conference on rural development held in the Irish city of Cork on November 9, 1996, under the title ‘Rural Europe: prospects for the future’, approves the Cork Declaration, which establishes a decalogue whose first precept establishes preference rural as a priority in the policies of the European Union, the remaining nine reiterate elements of previous declarations of principles that, to a large extent, had been applied with the LEADER programs.

Rural development then includes horizontal actions with different objectives, among which it is worth mentioning: achieving a viable agricultural sector, avoiding rural depopulation and preserving the natural heritage. In those years, it was considered that to achieve these objectives, subsidies should be granted for the development of various activities related to the environment, rural tourism, agribusiness, forestry or the installation of young farmers, to name just a few examples.

The priorities given to rural development are, among others: a) promoting the competitiveness of agriculture; b) guarantee the sustainable management of natural resources and climate action; and c) achieve balanced territorial development of rural economies and communities that includes job creation and preservation (^{Parlamento Europeo, 2018b}). Consequently, the European Commission establishes as measures to be supported by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development: advice, investments, farms, forestry measures, agro-environmental action, organic farming, environmental services, areas with natural limitations, cooperation, the LEADER program (^{MAGRAMA, 2016}).