Archive:Agri-environmental indicator - intensification - extensification

Data from November 2012. Most recent data: Further information, Main tables and Database.

This article provides a fact sheet of the European Union (EU) agri-environmental indicator "Intensification/extensification". It consists of an overview of recent data, complemented by all information on definitions, measurement methods and context needed to interpret them correctly. The Intensification/extensification article is part of a set of similar fact sheets providing a complete picture of the state of the agri-environmental indicators in the EU.

The intensity of a farm can be defined as the level of inputs used by the farm per unit of factor of production (in general land). Intensification is defined as the increase in farm intensity,
while the extensification describes the opposite trends.

Main indicator: Trend in the shares of the agricultural area managed by low, medium and high intensity farm.

Supporting indicator: Average inputs expenditures per hectare in constant input prices.

Indicators are broken down by EU group, Member States, type of farming and less favoured area (LFA) .

Main statistical findings

Key messages

In the EU-15, a continuous trend towards extensification (decrease of utilised agricultural area (UAA) share managed by highly intensive farms and increase of UAA share managed by low input farms) has been observed since 2004. In the 10 Member States which joined the EU in 2004 (EU-N10), the share of UAA managed by medium and high intensity farms increases whereas the one managed by low intensity farms decreases, which indicates intensification. However, the UAA managed by low intensity farms (as defined in this note) represents around a half of the total EU-N10 UAA.
The trend by Member State can be significantly different from the EU-group average. In the EU-15, extensification is observed to a more or less extent in 12 Member States over the period studied. In the EU-N10, the share of UAA managed by low intensity farms is decreasing in 5 Member States. In the others, no clear trend can be identified over the period studied.
The average inputs expenditures per hectare are very linked to the IRENA type of farming: Cropping fallow land and grazing livestock permanent grass farms have on average lower input levels and pigs and poultry and horticulture farms have higher input levels. The trend (intensification or extensification) is more explained by the EU-group or country than by the IRENA type of farming.
In the EU-15 overall it is difficult to identify any trend towards intensification or extensification by Less Favoured Area (LFA) class over the period studied, even though there seems to be a trend towards extensification over the end of the period. In the EU-N10, intensification can be observed in the three LFA classes. However the speed of intensification seems higher for the non LFA class, medium for LFA not mountain and low for LFA mountain. This might reflect a higher intensification in the most productive regions where you can increase more efficiently productivity than in LFA.
In Bulgaria and Romania, no trend is available yet at the time of drafting the fact-sheet (FADN contains data only from the year of accession).

Please note:

The inputs expenditures per hectare in constant national input prices allow approaching the trend in volume of inputs used per hectare, since price fluctuations and inflation are deducted. However, it does not capture differences of inputs' prices between countries and the differences of prices within each category of inputs (for example between a pesticide A and a pesticide B). Therefore it does not give the exact volume of inputs used for a year in a country. Yet, to properly interpret and qualify the trends for the main indicator, it is necessary to look at the average level of intensity in the country/region. Intensification in a country with very low intensity does not mean the same for the environment than intensification in a country with high intensity. That is the purpose of the supporting indicator: average inputs expenditures per hectare in constant input prices. It is not the ideal measurement of intensity; however it is the best estimate that can be obtained until now from the available data.
All inputs are not included: water use could not be included because there is no consistent information on it. Energy use is not included since it is addressed in another specific Agri-environmental indicator and since it would have been more difficult to interpret the results.
It should be noted that common land is not included in the area used for the indicator. The area of common land used (but not rented) by the farm is actually very difficult to estimate. This can have an impact on the results for Spain, Greece, the United Kingdom and Bulgaria in particular. The area used by the farm may be underestimated. It means that the ratio of inputs per hectare may be overestimated. Therefore the share of area managed by medium and high intensity farms may be overestimated in these countries, leading to an underestimation of the share of area managed by low intensity farms.
Each farm is classified according to the level of input expenditure per ha. The thresholds distinguishing high/medium/low intensity farms have been set in such a way that the EU-15 utilised agricultural area is equally divided into the three categories for the first year of the analysis (1995 for the EU-15). These levels do not pretend to represent the borders of what is extensive and intensive farming. They are just set in order to study the trends of shares in area managed by different categories of intensity farms.
These thresholds having been set without taking into account the different price levels between countries, two similar farms in terms of real input use may be classified differently according to the country they are located in: due to a higher price level of inputs in high income countries, the farm in a high income country may be classified as high, while the farm with the same real input use in a low income country may be classified as medium. There are, however, no clear differences in price level between the EU-15 and the 12 Member States which joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 (EU-N12).
It should be highlighted that the change of each indicator between the extreme years of the period covered may be misleading because of various trends during the period studied. That is why annual data covering the whole period studied are displayed and looked at.
Last but not least, it should be underlined that the potential environmental damage is not always proportionate to the volume or to the expenditure of inputs: for example, one litre of a certain pesticide might be more damaging for the environment than 5 litres of another one. Therefore the results should be interpreted with caution.

Data sources and availability

Context

Further Eurostat information

Publications

Title of the publication

Main tables

Title of top Main tables folder, see:

Title(s) of second level folder (if any)

Title(s) of third level folder (if any)

Database

Title of top Database folder, see:

Title(s) of second level folder (if any)

Title(s) of third level folder (if any)

Other information

Regulation 1737/2005 (generating url [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32005R1737:EN:NOT Regulation 1737/2005]) of DD Month YYYY on ...
Directive 2003/86/EC (generating url [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003L0086:EN:NOT Directive 2003/86/EC]) of DD Month YYYY on ...
Commission Decision 2003/86/EC (generating url [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003D0086:EN:NOT Commission Decision 2003/86/EC]) of DD Month YYYY on ...

External links

Name of organisation/web site/deep link

Notes

[[Category:<Subtheme category name(s)>|Statistical article]] [[Category:<Statistical article>|Statistical article]]