News | 20 Jan 2025

Assessment of results-based interventions

Experts analysed examples of result-based interventions in EU countries and outside the EU. They highlighted the role of evaluation in designing these interventions to protect the environment.

Aerial view of a regenerative farm featuring diverse crop rotation patterns

What constitutes a result-based intervention and what does not? What insights can we learn from examples in CAP Strategic Plans and beyond? What role does evaluation play in designing, implementing and assessing these interventions? These key questions were addressed by experts participating in the Thematic Working Group ‘Assessment of results-based interventions’ from March to October 2024.

Experts acknowledged that result-based CAP interventions could provide beneficiaries with a payment that is, at least partly, dependent on achieving defined and verifiable outcomes that can be measured in the field or estimated by scientific models.

Participants analysed examples of result-based interventions in Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Poland, Spain, Slovenia, and LIFE projects and payment schemes in the USA, Australia, and Switzerland, as well as an extended literature review.

Most of these result-based interventions contribute to maintaining or improving biodiversity. Payments depend on indicators that reflect, for example, the presence and abundance of certain groups of plant species, landscape elements, birds or their nests, or more complex concepts such as vegetation structure and habitat quality.

In some cases, such as Ireland and Portugal, a combination of indicators, which goes beyond biodiversity and also includes threats to water and soil quality, points to the direction of a holistic approach towards payments for ecosystem services.

Examples of result-based interventions contributing to water and soil quality, animal welfare, and climate change mitigation have also been identified and analysed. In the specific context of climate change and carbon farming, the role of private sector initiatives in the context of voluntary carbon markets was also discussed.

Training for farmers, advisors, and administrators is essential. Collaborating across groups of farmers or communities can address large-scale environmental challenges, improve resource efficiency, and reduce monitoring costs.

Lessons learned during the Thematic Working Group recognise the need for a whole-farm approach. Scorecards may be a useful tool to link payments to results, enabling comprehensive and holistic assessments across several environmental objectives.

Evaluation plays a significant role in all stages of result-based interventions. In the design phase, it can be used to understand and find ways to mitigate beneficiaries’ and administrations’ perceived risks and make the interventions more appealing, considering also any potential unintended effects. Costs of the implementation and the efficiency of these interventions can also be assessed. Costas Apostolopoulos, Evaluation Manager of the Evaluation Helpdesk and coordinator of the Thematic Working Group

During the implementation, evaluation can be used to assess the long-term validity of the results achieved and the coherence with other non-result-based interventions. Evaluations can also show how these interventions contribute to the corresponding objectives and how measured results can be used, complimentary to PMEF indicators, to better analyse the performance of the CAP towards environment and climate objectives.

Read the report on the EU CAP Network website.