The EU-wide systems for mapping farm fields eligible for subsidy are helping to cut the number of errors in payments to farmers, but there is still room for further improvement, according to a new report from the European Court of Auditors published on Tuesday 25 October.
A land parcel identification system (LPIS) is an IT system based on aerial or satellite photographs recording all agricultural parcels in the member states. It is a key control mechanism under the common agricultural policy (CAP) designed to verify eligibility for area‑based subsidies, which amounted to approximately €45.5 billion in 2015.
In its statement of assurance (SoA) for 2014, the Court estimated the level of error for the European agricultural guarantee fund (EAGF) at 2.9 % (2.2 % if cross‑compliance errors are excluded). Close to half of the errors were area‑related. The system also increasingly plays a role in checking compliance with various environmental obligations. In the 28 member states, there are currently 44 national or regional LPISs in operation, containing over 135 million reference parcels.
The auditors examined whether the LPISs were well managed by member states and adequately monitored by the European Commission. They visited five member states: Austria, Germany (Saarland and North Rhine-Westphalia), Ireland, Poland and the United Kingdom (Scotland).
The Court report says that the LPIS is a useful tool for determining the eligibility of agricultural land but its management could be “further improved”. 1) The Court identified some weaknesses in LPIS processes affecting the member states’ ability to reliably check the eligibility of land. While LPIS ortho‑imagery was mostly up‑to‑date, photo‑interpretation was not always reliable or conclusive. 2) The Court found that member states had made progress in upgrading their LPISs to meet the 2014-2020 CAP requirements. However, LPISs had not yet been completely adapted for greening. Some efforts by the Commission to simplify the CAP had had mixed results. 3) The Commission’s performance of its monitoring role has improved. However, the Court identified weaknesses in the applied methodology and insufficient checks and follow‑up by the Commission.
The Court recommends that member states ensure that, using their LPISs, they reliably identify and register, and then effectively monitor, ecological focus areas (linked to the greening of aid), permanent grassland and new categories of land and thereafter ensure effective monitoring.
The Court cites Scotland among the examples of good practice in verifying the evidence of the right to use the land. It notes weaknesses in monitoring permanent grasslands, particularly in Austria and North Rhine-Westphalia. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)