Agriculture and Rural Development Demonstrating compliance with article 46 of RDR for investments in irrigation Meeting of the Strategic Coordination Group for the WDF Common Implementation Strategy (5 November 2014) Christine FALTER, AGRI H1 DG Agriculture and Rural Development European Commission

Demonstrating compliance with article 46 of RDR for investments in irrigation EAFRD support for irrigation – intention and legal basis What is required in Rural Development Programmes (RDPs)? Clarification of specific issues 2

EAFRD support for irrigation – legal basis Recital (35) RDR: "… EAFRD to support investments in irrigation to provide economic and environmental benefits, provided that the sustainability of the irrigation concerned is ensured" Art. 46 RDR: sets out conditions for support Measures for supporting investments in irrigation Sub-measure 4.1  Equipment located on the holding  (Off-farm) "infrastructure" – to be used only for irrigation - not freely available for use by anyone who might wish to have access to it Sub-measure 4.3  (Off-farm) infrastructure – to be used only for irrigation - freely available for use by anyone who might wish to have access to it Sub-measure 7.2  Small-scale water infrastructure - used not only for irrigation but also for other purposes. 3

Requirements of article 46 RDR 4 Two general basic conditions River basin management plan (RBMP) Water metering at level of investment 2 scenarios with separate conditions Improvement to irrigation equipment already in place Net increase of irrigated area affecting given water body 1 2

Scenario 1 – Art. 46(4) 5 Improvement to equipment already in place "Potential water saving" (efficiency gain) of at least 5 – 25 %, assessed ex ante Does affected water body have a quantity- related problem (WFD framework)? No actual reduction in water use required Required actual reduction in water use = 50 % of potential water saving NoYes

"Potential water saving" Potential water saving = increase in water efficiency "a reduction which, thanks to the investment, could now be made to the amount of water flowing through the equipment affected by the investment without having a negative impact on the crops to which the water is finally being provided." (Presidency document of October 2012) 6

Example: potential water saving & effective reduction in water use Investment in on-farm equipment Farmer switching from basic sprinkler system to drip irrigation m3 to achieve certain yield New system can achieve same yield with m3 Potential water saving = m3 (20 %) Status of water body is less than good 50 % of potential water saving has to be converted into actual reduction in water use 50 % of 2000 m3 = m3 Economic benefit for farmer + environmental benefit 7

Scenario 2 – Art. 46(5) 8 Net increase in irrigated area affecting given water body Does affected water body have a quantity- related problem (WFD framework)? + environmental analysis required Derogations apply? Support not permitted NoYes No Yes

Scenario 2 - derogations Net increase in irrigated area drawing on water body with a scarcity problem is not permitted, except for some derogations….. Derogation 1 – linked investments Water required comes from a water saving resulting from a linked investment in existing irrigation equipment Derogation 2 - reservoir Water needed supplied from reservoir approved before 31 October 2013 Reservoir is identified and monitored in line with the Water Framework Directive A limit on abstractions / minimum required flow was in in force on 31 October 2013 The investment in new irrigated area respects this limit 9

What is required in RDPs? Sufficent detail on broad categories of investment (improvements in existing equipment/ infrastructure, net extension to irrigated area, or both) Improvements to existing facilities: Sufficient ambition concerning potential water savings: different minima, OR single minimum (selection criteria granting extra points for projects offering higher potential savings) If water body with less-than-good status is affected: actual reduction in water use Net extension to irrigated areas: Set out conditions of art. 46(5) Identify if derogations of art. 46(6) apply Intention to take into account area irrigated in "recent past" (art. 46(5)) when determining net increase? 10

Clarification of specific issues Cases which are considered support in increase in irrigated area: "mixed projects": improvement of existing infrastructure combined with extension of infrastructure "transferring" burden of water abstractions from one water body to another) Formal status of a water body cannot change over the year (MS cannot consider "seasonal status") Effective reductions in water use calculation of baseline: as a maximum an average calculated over 5 years (in case of review of permit: revised maximum abstraction volume to be considered as baseline) calculation of actually achieved saving: a reduction every year is recommended 11

Thank you for your attention!