REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE FORESTRY AND

REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FOOD Department for structural policy and rural development INTEGRAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT AS THE GROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY BONN, 3. -7. 09. 2005 GORAN SOSTER SRDN Slovenian rural development network Janja Kokolj Prošek MAFF Luka Juvancic BTF

WHEN NEW WINDS START TO BLOW, SOME PEOPLE BUILD WINDBREAKERS, BUT SMART PEOPLE BUILD WINDMILLS. 2

GEOGRAPHIC POSITION OF SLOVENIA ØTerritory: 20. 256 km 2 ØBorders: Italy (202 km), Austria (324 km), Hungary (88 km), Croatia (546 km), 46 km of coastal line ØGeographical macro regions: -alpine (12% of territory), -sub alpine (31%), -subpannonian (23%), -dinaric-karst (26%), -sub Mediterranean (8%) ØInhabitants (1998): 1. 982. 603 Population density: 97. 9 inhab. /km 2 ØRural population: 57. 3 % 3

SLOVENIAN COUNTRYSIDE Ø In Slovenia countryside occupies 93% of total area, there lives 60 % of all population ØLarge number of settlements, mainly very small (almost 6. 000) Ø 80% of all settlements are in hilly, mountainous and karst areas, there are just 40 % of people living there Ø 86. 467 European comparable agriculture holdings Ø Average largeness of farm with forests is 9, 9 ha Ø Average largeness of 5, 9 ha agricultural land on farm Ø 80% of Slovenian areas are LFA 4

SLOVENIAN AGRICULTURAL POLICY Basis for Integrated Rural Development are: Ø Strategy for development of agriculture (1993): beside production important role in preserving of culture landscape, protection of natural resources, protection of the environment and incorporation of Integrated rural development. Ø Programme of agricultural policy reform (1998 -2002): four pillars of agricultural policy 5

POST ACCESSION IMPLEMENTATION Year 2004 Preaccession programme SAPARD National scheme Rural development programme 2004 – 2006 Implementation of 7 measures within Single programming document 2004 2006 (SPD) 6

RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN SLOVENIA Rural development policy • Objective: development of rural areas (preservation of environment, settlement, vitality) Long term Integrate d Self renewable 7

RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES Ø CRPOV programmes (Integrated Rural Development and Village renewal Programmes) Ø Rural development programmes - Local development initiatives support 8

2000: Establishing of SRDN Slovenian Rural development network • The CRPOV Programme of Integrated Rural development and other rural development projects over the last 12 years have shown that there is a need of formal and effective cooperation and networking between those who offer support and funding and those who actually carry out development projects. • The neeed for PARTNERSHIP in horizontal and vertical direction 9

SLOVENIAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT NETWORK • Legal based on the law for establishing nonprofitable organisations • STRUCTURE – Aktive Members (200) – Management board (8) - elected by members • President • Underpresident • Members – Suppervisory board (3) – Financial control (3) – Disciplinary comision (3) 10

SLOVENIAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT NETWORK – THE MISSION STATEMENT • To bring together all players on a field of rural development • To inform and educate the members and others • Cooperation and mutual help among individuals and organisations • To ensure effective representation of rural interests in the flow of information between Government and NGOs and from local to regional and national to international level • To be active partner in the process of forming legislation and Rural Development Policy 11

MAIN IDEA ON CRPOV PROJECTS IN 90’TIES THE MAIN IDEA IS 3 X I Ø i – Identity Ø i – Innovation Øi - Initiative 12

PRINCIPLES OF THE CRPOV PROGRAMME Three steps of the CRPOV programmes: Preparation starting the programme Introduction development strategy for villages and future development Implementation action plan and its of the projects implementation in rural areas 13

CRPOV DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Ø Five different working areas (themes) Ø Animation and education Ø Project management CULTURAL SPACE LIVING SPACE SETTLEMENT SPACE SOCIAL SPACE WORKING SPACE 14

RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES RDP Introduced in year 1996 with the intention to continue and upgrade CRPOV projects Basic characteristics: Ø It combines development goals of at least three municipalities Ø It represents basics for the preparation of implementation of LEADER programmes Ø Same methodology and approach as with CRPOV projects 15

CONTEMPORARY GUIDELINES FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT • Local partnerships – carriers of local development – – Development objectives set Appropriately organised Included in every development faze “Bottom up” approach • Profession – “right hand” in the development process – Helping the population with definiton of aimes – Presence at all times (monitoring activities) • Municipality – important factor for development of local areas – Contemporary trends of decentralisation – Village development – important task for local communities and municipalities – European countries: Integral development principle – Responsibility, independence and autonomy from external sources 16

CURRENT SITUATION ON THE CRPOV PROJECTS FIELD Two types of projects: v CRPOV projects for the area of village, settlement, and part of the municipality. Since 1991 till 2003 cca. 300 projects in different phases of implementation v Rural development programmes - projects for the area covering at least three municipalities. Since 1996 till 2003 19 projects in 118 municipalities, 20 projects of Wine roads of Slovenia in 76 municipalities 17

UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMIC OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CHANGES • It is necessary to know that gradually building of the rural development policy adopted to the specifics of particular country is proper GROUNDING for the common rural RDP in EU 25 (strong enough to hold the new building, which shape was inspired from the western experience) 18

EFFECTIVE RDP: BUILDING ON THE PROPER GROUNDING • Continually informing and awarenesss rising of the farmers to avoid the conflicts and misunderstanding of the CAP • Selection of the proper measures to the national circumstances (tradition, needs, oportunities) • Monitoring and evaluation in the function of the permanent improvements of the RDP 19

SLOVENIA 2004 -06: FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND PROGRAMME OF THE MEASURES FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT Programme document 2004 - 2006 Rural Development Plan 2004 -06 Single Programming Document 2004 -06 Financial frame 2004 - 2006 249, 8 mio EUR 23, 6 mio EUR Structure funds total: 237, 5 mio EUR Financing line 'Rural 'Structure funds' development' EAGGF – guarrantee section Guidance section 20

IMPLEMENTATION OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME: EU 15 (2000 -03); Slovenia (2004 -06) 21

SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION OF THE CAP MEASURES WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IMPROVEMENT • In Slovenia the number of the Organic farms grew constantly in co-relation with the stimulating measures (payments) – 2004: 1. 600 farms in control (apr. 3, 5%) • In 2004 the total payments per farm reached permitted upper level of maximal payments • Huge shift from the conventional to integrative farming with tremendous environmental impact • TO SMALL difference between organic and integrative farms (WRONG MESSAGE) 22

NATURA 2000 IN SLOVENIA: CHALLENGE FOR THE NEW FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE 2007 - 2013 Government 29. 4. 2004 (Ur. l. RS, št. 49/2004) SPA - 26 areas (22, 8 %) SCI - 260 areas (31, 6 %) TOTAL - 35, 5 % (9 % above 900 m) 23

NATURA 2000: BUILDING ON THE WEEK GROUNDING • It was URGENT NEEDED programme for the protection of the European nature heritage • Week grounding in social sense (UP – BOTTOM APPROACH) • Not ready for implementation because of the lack of communication (CONFLICTS WITH THE LAND OWNERS) 24

SAVING NATURA 2000 • Saving the programme Natura 2000 is possible only with the BOTTOM - UP establishing of the MANAGEMENT PLANS for non covered areas – including the parks • Ownership • Financial resources ? 25

CO-RELATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF RDP • For THOUSANDS YEARS small farmers were keeping tradition of sustainable agriculture • Only one generation was needed to loose the proportions of sustainability (size according only to the technical capacities, environmental demmage, loosing of fertile-living soil, …) • Huge domination of the small, medium and semisubsistence farms in the world WHICH DO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATIVES IN ANY BODY 26

• “To expect” is justified. • “To take measures” is necessary. • “TO EXECUTE” • is the only thing that counts. 27