Assessment of results-based interventions

From February to October 2024, the EU CAP Network, supported by the European Evaluation Helpdesk for the CAP, organised the Thematic Working Group ‘’Assessment of result-based interventions’’, aiming to develop a shared definition, analyse the recent experiences in several Member States, and determine how to set up the evaluation of these interventions in the context of CAP Strategic Plans.  

This report presents the main highlights of this debate among researchers, evaluators, and representatives of ten Member States.  

Several examples of result-based interventions have already been found in the CAP Strategic Plans of Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Poland, Slovenia, and Spain, as well as under the LIFE programme, and, beyond the EU, in Switzerland, the USA, and Australia. 

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. 

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.  

The analysis of the examples of result-based interventions found under the CAP showed that the main concerns of farmers and administrations relate to the increased perceived risk and complexity of these interventions. Practical examples of result-based interventions in the CAP Strategic Plans show that these risks can be substantially mitigated. 

Evaluation plays a significant role in all stages of result-based interventions. In the design phase, it can be used to understand how to mitigate beneficiaries’ and administrations’ perceived risks and make the interventions more appealing. 

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. Since beneficiaries of result-based interventions are free to choose the most appropriate practices to achieve results, evaluations during the implementation can look at the effectiveness and efficiency of the different approaches. 

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 in protecting the environment.