Realized environmental values of Environmental Fallow policy measure

A novel agri-environment scheme for Environmental Fallow (EF) was introduced in Finland to replace a former obligatory CAP set-aside. Though potentially highly valuable, the ability of the current scheme for delivering the stated objectives of water protection, biodiversity, and soil state is yet to be confirmed. The presentation evaluates the role of the scheme for protection of surface waters and biodiversity based on data from the farmer interviews, field data on vegetation, and land-use register for the regions of Uusimaa, Pohjois-Pohjanmaa and Pirkanmaa. In 2010, over 7% of the agricultural utilized area was enrolled under the scheme with four types of fields: long-term grasslands, and fields sown with meadow plants, game crops or landscape flowers. The scheme has been highly popular among farmers but requires agronomic development of the options to reduce establishment failure, and optimise management for the best environmental output with the least agronomic problems. The potential of the scheme to protect surface waters is marginal since only 10% of EFs is situated near the water courses. The option of fallowing by establishing grassland, or by enrolling existing low productive grassland, was the most popular type of EF. The most biologically valuable meadow type remains rare, and the desired vegetation composition is non stable. The vegetation composition of the EF is more diverse than that under the former set-aside and also differs from that of other non-cropped biotopes such as margins and semi-natural grasslands. Plant species diversity correlated negatively with the reported fertility level of the parcels and therefore establishing grassland and meadow fallows on the least productive parcels is ecologically justified. However, possible targeting of the options according to the landscape setting should be investigated. At the current level, the scheme has succeeded to reverse the fallowing area to its state during the EU set-aside period. However, potential long-term efficiency of the current scheme is likely to be compromised by its untargeted and unbinding nature, and existing agronomic challenges in “sowing for nature”. Without a minimum required area, the scheme totally depends on the current and forecasted profit margin.