Why negotiations on the CAP and the EU budget are jeopardising the green transition of EU agriculture

The document examines how proposed changes to the CAP and EU budget threaten the green transition of agriculture. It highlights the risk of making direct payment capping voluntary, the potential for diverting rural development funds to hectare-based payments, and the use of flawed climate expenditure tracking. It also warns that NGEU recovery funds may be distributed without green conditionality. ClientEarth calls for mandatory capping, ring-fencing at least 50% of the EAGF for qualitative eco-schemes, and a science-based methodology for tracking climate spending.

• The European Council's proposed budget for the CAP is lower than the 2014-2020 period, totaling €343.944 billion compared to €382.855 billion.
• The Agrifish Council has proposed making the capping and degressivity of direct payments voluntary for Member States, contradicting the European Commission's proposal to cap payments at €100,000 and reduce them starting at €60,000.
• There is a risk that funds will be shifted from the European Agriculture Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) to direct payments; the Agrifish Council suggests a flexibility of up to 30%, while the European Parliament proposes a limit of 5% provided the increase goes to eco-schemes.
• Eco-schemes, intended to reward voluntary environmental efforts, face insufficient funding guarantees, with the Agrifish Council proposing a ring-fence of only 20% of the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF).
• The 'Rio markers' approach for tracking climate expenditure is criticized by the European Court of Auditors and IEEP as incapable of reflecting actual climate change mitigation spending, yet the Council of ministers continues to support it.
• The €7.5 billion from Next Generation EU (NGEU) for agriculture may be allocated during the interim period under the 2014-2020 CAP conditionality, potentially removing the obligation for Member States to support a green recovery.

APA

ClientEarth (2020). Why negotiations on the CAP and the EU budget are jeopardising the green transition of EU agriculture. https://www.clientearth.org/media/tbwf4jc0/clientearth_why-negotiations-on-the-cap-and-the-eu-budget-are-jeopardising-the-green-transition-of-eu-agriculture.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Why negotiations on the CAP and the EU budget are jeopardising the green transition of EU agriculture. 2020. https://www.clientearth.org/media/tbwf4jc0/clientearth_why-negotiations-on-the-cap-and-the-eu-budget-are-jeopardising-the-green-transition-of-eu-agriculture.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=ClientEarth |title=Why negotiations on the CAP and the EU budget are jeopardising the green transition of EU agriculture |date=25 November 2020 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/tbwf4jc0/clientearth_why-negotiations-on-the-cap-and-the-eu-budget-are-jeopardising-the-green-transition-of-eu-agriculture.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{clientearth2020why, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Why negotiations on the CAP and the EU budget are jeopardising the green transition of EU agriculture}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2020}, month = nov, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/tbwf4jc0/clientearth_why-negotiations-on-the-cap-and-the-eu-budget-are-jeopardising-the-green-transition-of-eu-agriculture.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }