EU CAP Network Seminar: Delivering the CAP today and beyond

David Lamb (EU CAP Network) welcomed participants and provided an overview of the types of stakeholders and countries represented in the room. He then passed the floor to Gijs Schilthuis (DG AGRI), who reflected on the implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans three years after their launch. He noted that while most interventions have met their milestones, some experienced delays, mainly due to overlapping between funding periods and the early stage of the implementation cycle. He highlighted encouraging results in eco-schemes, farm modernisation, income support and young farmers’ aid, alongside progress in soil protection, carbon sequestration and organic farming. However, he pointed to slower advances in redistribution and risk management, slightly lower than expected progress on biodiversity, and bottlenecks related to digitalisation. He also underlined the European Commission’s ongoing simplification efforts, including adjustments to the Small Farmers scheme, aimed at reducing administrative burdens. Stressing that success depends on people and processes, he called for stronger collaboration, knowledge exchange, and adaptability to changing circumstances to ensure effective delivery of the CAP’s economic, environmental and social objectives in the years ahead.

The first panel session set the tone for the day by presenting early evidence, national experiences and stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans (CSPs).

Erika Olsson, an organic farmer from Sweden representing Ekologiska Lantbrukarna, offered a grounded perspective. Managing a 20-hectare organic farm with 40 beef cows and 120 sheep, she explained that roughly one third of her family’s income comes from the CAP — a vital yet unpredictable share that depends on administrative efficiency. While Sweden benefits from transparent governance and broad stakeholder consultation, she stressed that timely and predictable payments are critical for cashflow and investment. She urged the need for clearer timelines for both controls and payments, arguing that uncertainty forces farmers to rely on bank loans, diverting resources away from productive investment. She also highlighted that eco-schemes work best when they are simple, familiar and easy to control, citing cover crops as a straightforward example. However, she warned that areas under organic farming in Sweden have decreased, and noted that national targets have been lowered. Ambition must be matched with effective tools. Olsson highlighted the effective role of Sweden’s Monitoring Committee in ensuring transparency, and called for regular exchanges of good practices between Member States. She concluded by emphasising that finding balance between high ambition and simple administration is vital, and that supporting small and medium-sized family farms is essential for Europe’s resilience in future crises.

Teemu Hauhia, head of Finland’s CAP Network Support Unit, and a farmer himself, shared Finland’s long-standing experience with environmental schemes, dating back to 1995. He noted that 95% of Finnish farms participate in eco-schemes, a successful rate explained by strong national and regional networks, early training of all actors, and clear communication. The country’s regional communications network is a model of effective coordination and peer learning. Hauhia acknowledged challenges in digital transition, as Finland phased out paper applications entirely in this programming period; however, self-evaluation exercises for Managing and Paying Authorities have already helped to identify improvements. Looking ahead, he encouraged greater EU-level exchange of good practices, and warned against neglecting the wider rural context, stressing that vibrant rural economies and entrepreneurship are key to long-term agricultural resilience.

Reinier Schouten, from the Dutch Managing Authority, described the Netherlands’ experience with implementing its CSP. The Plan was approved in late 2022, leaving limited time for authorities to set up IT systems and communicate effectively with farmers before the first applications opened. Despite these challenges, he reported strong participation in and oversubscription to eco-schemes, reflecting farmers’ readiness to engage and broad political support across the spectrum. Schouten acknowledged that implementation has been administratively demanding, with farmers often needing advisory support to apply, but this is the necessary learning curve in a new delivery model. He underlined the importance of stability and predictability, cautioning against major mid-period changes, and also recognised the role of the flexibility introduced in the CSP to address regional needs. Looking ahead, he stressed that timely preparation and smoother coordination between Managing and Paying Authorities will be key for the transition to the next programming period.

Sönke Beckmann, from the German Landcare Association (DVL), presented the German perspective from a decentralised and multi-level governance context. DVL is a national umbrella organisation that promotes cooperation and dialogue between the agricultural and environmental sectors at regional and local levels. Beckmann explained that this collaborative model fosters practical solutions, but also reflects the broader complexity of managing CAP implementation across 16 regions. He highlighted DVL’s point-based systems to remunerate biodiversity and ecosystem services, aimed at ensuring CAP payments better reward the provision of public goods. While Germany’s eco-schemes have delivered visible outputs, he noted that impact indicators often fail to capture real environmental improvements, and stakeholder involvement in final decision-making remains limited. Beckmann cautioned that simplification should not come at the expense of environmental ambition, calling instead for transparent processes, stable long-term planning, and a shared vision for gradually reducing dependence on direct payments while supporting income opportunities favouring diversification and ecosystem service provision.

Throughout the discussion, panellists agreed on the need for clearer decision-making, predictable timelines, stronger coordination, and active stakeholder engagement to make the CAP both effective and inclusive in practice.

Participants were divided into six groups to exchange practical experiences from the first years of CAP Strategic Plan implementation. Each group focused on one key topic: environmental and climate payments, climate change adaptation, competitiveness, advice and knowledge tools, digitalisation, and processes and actors. They reflected on what has worked well in implementing the CSP in their national contexts, identified recurring challenges, and discussed key enabling factors supporting effective implementation. 

A second round of group discussions built on the outcomes of the first round and shifted from analysis to action. Participants formulated proposals to scale up successful approaches and remove barriers to implementation. Each group worked to identify ‘quick wins’ achievable within the current CAP period, as well as longer-term actions relevant for the post-2027 framework.

Six rapporteurs shared the key outcomes from their respective discussion groups.

Justin Zahra (Environmental Defence Fund Europe) reported that the group identified a strong environmental mindset, good advisory support, and simple, outcome-oriented scheme design as critical enablers. Simplicity, flexibility and knowledge exchange can encourage innovation and uptake. Well-calibrated payment levels help deliver both environmental and economic benefits. In general, measures that are familiar to farmers and flexible in implementation are often the most effective. The group also identified key challenges: the need to set adequate payment levels, limited budgets, and complex monitoring and reporting systems. Incoherence with other environmental policies and insufficient measurable indicators can further hinder impact.

Laura Sauques (IFOAM Organics Europe) stressed that farmers’ willingness to adopt resilience-building practices depends on clear communication, flexibility at regional level, and visible economic and environmental benefits. Awareness of climate risks remains uneven, and adaptation takes time. Risk-management tools and green investments are not yet sufficiently attractive or accessible. Participants called for a ‘territorial toolbox’ within the CAP to combine short-term risk measures with long-term resilience strategies, supported by public procurement and market recognition for sustainable products.

Mara Lai (CREA, Italy) underlined the contribution of the CSPs to farm modernisation, young farmer support, and cooperative initiatives under Article 77. However, investment support is often constrained by administrative burden, delayed payments, and limited budgets. A balance is needed between simplification and maintaining strategic quality, while control procedures should allow for more flexibility. Strengthening advisory services and simplified cost options were seen as ways to close knowledge gaps and make investments more attractive.

Peter Paree (ZLTO, Netherlands) highlighted that effective advisory systems depend on strong connections and trust between farmers and advisers through peer-to-peer learning, demonstration farms and regional approaches. Continuous training and lifelong learning are essential, as are simpler procedures and less paperwork for advisers. A more holistic link between farm advice, research, and societal needs was encouraged.

Marta Bastos (Forest Engineer, Portugal) emphasised the role of digital tools in reducing administrative burden and improving feedback to farmers. Interoperability between data systems is both an enabler and a challenge. She noted that digital skills and education, not age, are the real barriers to wider uptake. Successful initiatives, such as the use of geotagged photos, show how digitalisation can make controls simpler and more transparent.

Francesca Toffetti (Regione Piemonte, Italy) focused on governance and participation. ‘Accessible’ CSPs with clear rules, national strategies, and strong coordination across administration levels were seen as prerequisites for inclusive delivery. Existing structures, such as Monitoring Committees, should be used to streamline engagement. Persistent challenges include overlapping programming periods, complex coordination between levels of government, and the need to involve young farmers and new entrants more effectively in CSP design and implementation.

There was general agreement across the six groups on key enabling factors: simplification without lowering ambition, stronger knowledge and advisory systems, improved coordination and digital interoperability, and transparent, inclusive processes. Above all, they underlined the need for long-term vision and stability to support farmers in transitioning towards more competitive, resilient and sustainable agricultural systems.

Ricard Ramon I Sumoy (DG AGRI) concluded the seminar by stressing its timeliness, coinciding with both the ongoing implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans and the early discussions on the next programming period. He noted that this dual process embodies the logic of the EU’s seven-year policy cycles: learning from the first years of implementation to improve future design and delivery.

He highlighted that while there is no one-size-fits-all approach, given the diversity of Member States, several common challenges have emerged, notably complexity, administrative burden, and the need for greater digital uptake. The Commission has already twice adopted simplification packages amending the CAP basic acts to address these issues, and continues to promote digitalisation, improved interoperability, and stronger coordination and networking at all levels. Predictability and long-term planning are essential for the farming sector, he noted, yet flexibility must also be built in to allow adaptation to changing circumstances and to strengthen resilience.

He emphasised the value of peer-to-peer exchanges and knowledge sharing in changing mindsets and ensuring policies respond to realities on the ground – adding that the EU CAP Network remains a crucial mechanism for feedback and dialogue among all actors involved in CAP delivery.

Looking at the future, he explained that the CAP proposal and its new framework build on the lessons learned from the current period. Although the overall structure evolves, notably through the merging of the two pillars into a single programming mechanism, the singularity and integrity of the CAP are preserved. Existing tools, from direct payments to LEADER, will remain, while new features such as farm relief services will enhance farmers’ quality of life. Adjustments to co-financing arrangements aim to strengthen Member States’ ownership and engagement.

He concluded by reaffirming that the CAP is already moving towards a performance-based approach and that continued collaboration with stakeholders on the ground will be key to ensuring effective and inclusive implementation in the years to come.