Learning Portal

Assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans

This learning portal guides readers through the assessment of CAP-supported digitalisation in agriculture and rural areas. It explains how to identify relevant interventions, assess digitalisation intensity and examine effects on productivity, rural development and simplification.

Page contents

In a nutshell

Digitalisation in the agrifood sector and rural areas can be understood as a systematic adoption and use of digital technologies, data, and networks across all facets of the agri-food sector and rural areas, including, where necessary, the development of corresponding infrastructures, with the aim of improving farm sustainable productivity, contributing to sustainable and inclusive development of rural areas and simplifying the delivery of the policy.

The assessment of digitalisation requires looking at how digital tools, data and connectivity contribute to sustainable productivity, administrative simplification and rural development. It also requires attention to the enabling conditions that allow digital solutions to function effectively, including reliable broadband and mobile connectivity, interoperable systems, digital skills, advisory capacity, appropriate governance frameworks and viable business models.

Relation to the CAP

Within the CAP, support for digitalisation may be embedded across a broad range of interventions, including investments, eco-schemes, environmental and climate commitments, LEADER, sectoral interventions and knowledge exchange activities. The level and intensity of adoption of such interventions define the extent to which digitalisation can contribute to expanding rural connectivity and digital infrastructure, support data-driven sustainability practices, strengthen advisory and innovation systems, improve traceability and market access, and support administrative simplification and monitoring systems.

At the same time, CAP support operates within a wider policy ecosystem that includes EU and national instruments related to digital infrastructure, innovation, data, regional development and place-based services, i.e. services tailored to the specific needs, capacities and challenges of particular rural territories and communities. The CAP is therefore not always the primary driver of digitalisation, but one contributor within a broader framework of policies and investments. This should be considered when defining the scope and proportionality of assessments.

Evaluating digitalisation combines three complementary elements:

Identification of digitalisation-related interventions, including through classification of interventions using a digitalisation classification system.
Collection of evidence through dedicated surveys and other information sources.
Use of tools that allow capturing both the immediate effects of CAP support to digitalisation on the modernisation of agricultural holdings and rural areas and the longer-term effects of adopted digitalisation on the sustainable productivity of the agrifood sector and the development of rural areas.

For a presentation of the theoretical framework for digitalisation and the role of the CAP, see this video, which is part of the webinar ‘Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’.

What to evaluate?

The evaluation should cover the range of CAP Strategic Plan interventions that contribute to digitalisation in agriculture and rural areas. This includes both interventions that explicitly aim to promote digitalisation and those where digital elements are embedded within broader support for investments, cooperation, knowledge exchange, smart villages, basic services, infrastructure, rural businesses or environmental and climate objectives.

As relevant support may not always be captured by digitalisation-related result indicators, the identification process should combine indicator-based screening and classification of interventions, based on a detailed review of intervention descriptions and keyword searches.

The assessment of digitalisation is particularly relevant for assessing the CAP Cross-cutting Objective (CCO) linked to modernisation, but it can also support assessments related to sustainable productivity and inclusive rural growth.

Preconditions

Before conducting the assessment, several conditions should be in place:

Access to intervention descriptions, as indicators alone cannot fully identify relevant support. Digitalisation may be explicit or implied through references to technologies, platforms, infrastructure, advisory tools, monitoring systems or digital services.
Access to structured information, including relevant result indicators and monitoring variables.
- R.3 Digitalising agriculture is directly linked to digital farming technology and is used to quantify the coverage of interventions promoting digital farming technologies and their use with CAP support through advice, European Innovation Partnership (EIP) Operational Group projects and physical investment support.
- Other indicators may also be relevant for rural development, smart villages, services and infrastructure, such as:
  - R.39 Developing the rural economy can be used to assess the extent to which CAP support contributes to the development of rural businesses, including bio-economy businesses, through digitalisation. It can capture businesses that use CAP support to introduce digital tools, platforms, data-driven processes, e-commerce solutions, smart logistics, digital processing systems or other technologies that improve competitiveness, diversification, market access or value creation in rural areas.
  - R.40 Smart transition of the rural economy can be used to assess the extent to which CAP support contributes to the development and/or implementation of Smart Villages strategies or projects, particularly where these involve digital tools, services or locally tailored solutions for rural communities.
  - R.41 Connecting rural Europe can be used to account for the share of the rural population benefiting from CAP-supported interventions aimed at improving access to services and infrastructure, including broadband.
- Monitoring variables such as M200 on broadband investment may further help identify relevant interventions.
Use of an appropriate classification, depending on the level of detail available in intervention descriptions, to identify the interventions that can be related to digitalisation.
Dedicated surveys where needed, especially when assessing adoption, intensity of use, barriers, perceptions or behavioural factors. Where possible, surveys should include both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, which may require early consideration of data availability and access to relevant contact details.

Step-by-step

Step 1 – Identify intervention related to digitalisation

Use the classification system, developed as part of the report ‘Assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’, to identify the relevant interventions.

The classification system is designed as a structured analytical workflow for identifying, categorising and assessing digitalisation-related interventions under the CAP Strategic Plans.

The classification system follows a three-tier structure with increasing levels of specificity. Interventions should always be classified at the highest level of detail supported by the available information.

Tier 1 – Strategic domains
Use Tier 1 when the intervention description refers only broadly to digitalisation or digital transformation.
- This level captures the overall area of support, such as digital foundations and capabilities, smart production, market integration and knowledge networks, environmental and social sustainability integration, or data economy and innovation ecosystems. In practice, this tier would cover cases where the descriptions of the interventions include only broad references to supporting digitalisation (e.g. ‘digitalisation in rural areas’, or ‘digital transformation of farms’) and no further information is available on the specific function, technology or activity supported.
Tier 2 – Functional groups
Use Tier 2 when the intervention identifies a broad digital function but does not specify technologies or implementation details.
- This level captures what the digitalisation support is intended to do, such as improving connectivity, strengthening digital skills, supporting precision agriculture, enabling digital advisory services, developing e-commerce or digital marketing, improving traceability, supporting smart villages, or strengthening data governance. In practice, this would cover cases where the descriptions of the interventions mention digitalisation activities (e.g. broadband access or precision agriculture) without specifying the exact tools, systems or technologies to be deployed.
Tier 3 – Specific activities
Use Tier 3 when the intervention identifies a specific technology, system or implementation activity.
- This level captures the concrete digital solutions supported, such as broadband deployment, sensors and monitoring equipment, GPS-guided machinery, variable-rate application systems, farm management software, robotics, e-commerce platforms, traceability systems, digital advisory platforms, rural digital hubs, early-warning systems, environmental monitoring tools, data-sharing platforms or agricultural data marketplaces. In practice, this would apply where the intervention description clearly identifies the technology, platform, equipment, service or system being funded or implemented.

See the report referenced above for more details on each tier. For a presentation of the classification system, see also this video, which is part of the webinar ‘Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’.

Begin by reviewing intervention descriptions carefully. Digitalisation may be referred to directly, but it may also appear indirectly through references to infrastructure, data systems, advisory tools, digital equipment, administrative systems or digital services. The objective is to identify whether the intervention contributes to digital transformation in practice, even where digitalisation is not explicitly mentioned.

Step 2 – Build an intervention logic for digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plan.

Once interventions have been identified and classified, build an intervention logic of how the CAP Strategic Plan supports digitalisation. Two distinct but interconnected processes can be considered when developing the intervention logic:

The support through the CAP Strategic Plans increases the adoption and intensity of digitalisation in the agrifood sector and rural areas.
The adopted digitalisation contributes to making farms more competitive and market-oriented, and to improving rural service accessibility and reducing the digital urban-rural divide.

The classification system described under Step 1 can be used to structure and validate the intervention logic by identifying the sequence of adoption of digitalisation. For example, it is not possible to adopt precision agriculture systems without having ensured broadband connectivity, but also the capacity of farmers to use digital tools.

The report referenced in Step 1 already includes a generic intervention logic, which evaluators may review and adjust to the specific context of the evaluation. For a presentation of the generic intervention logic, see also this video, which is part of the webinar ‘Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’.

Step 3 – Assess the effect of CAP support in fostering digitalisation for the modernisation of agriculture and rural areas

The Digital Decade Programme provides a solid basis for the dimensions that must be considered when assessing the effect of CAP support in fostering digitalisation for the modernisation of agriculture and rural areas.

Digital transformation generally progresses from foundational infrastructure and capabilities towards more sophisticated integrated systems. Advanced applications may therefore depend on earlier investments in connectivity, interoperability, equipment, digital skills and advisory support. Therefore, it is suggested to start the assessment by examining the effects of CAP support on digital infrastructure and connectivity enhancement, and on digital skills development and capacity building, before continuing with the effects on digital transformation in farms and rural enterprises and enhancement of public services.

The classification system helps in identifying which interventions support the different dimensions of the Digital Decade Programme:

Digital infrastructure and connectivity can be classified under the options of Domain A.
Digital skills and capacities can be classified by use of functional group A4 (digital skills).
Digital transformation in enterprises maps to Domains B-E.
Digital public services map mostly to Domain E and functional groups A5 (administrative infrastructure and compliance systems) and D3 (rural development)

A key concept when assessing the effects of CAP support in fostering digitalisation is the digitalisation intensity. Digitalisation intensity can be understood as a comprehensive metric that measures the extent to which farmers and rural areas have adopted, integrated, and utilised digital technologies across their operations and business processes. While adoption typically measures whether specific digital technologies have been implemented or the percentage of farm and rural areas that have acquired particular digital tools, digitalisation intensity provides a comprehensive assessment of how deeply and effectively these technologies are integrated across operations and processes. The table below summarises how digitalisation intensity can be approached.

Evaluation focus	Possible methods	What they help assess	Data needs/sources
Digitalisation intensity	Classification-based mapping; adoption and usage-intensity analysis; dedicated surveys	Whether digital tools are adopted, how frequently they are used, how deeply they are integrated into farm or rural activities, and which barriers affect uptake	Intervention descriptions; result indicators; data for monitoring and evaluation (DME); dedicated surveys of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries; Farm Sustainability Data Network (FSDN) where relevant

The classification system can be used to establish the baseline of intensity before the implementation of digitalisation-supporting policies. For example, if the situation regarding the adoption of digitalisation before the start of the policy maps mostly to Domain A, it suggests that the intensity is relatively low, characterised by activities that set up the infrastructure to enable further adoption.

For more details on how to assess the effect of CAP support in fostering digitalisation for the modernisation of agriculture and rural areas, see the report referenced in Step 1. For a presentation of the key points for this assessment, see also this video, which is part of the webinar ‘Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’.

Step 4 – Assess the effects of CAP support to digitalisation on farm sustainable productivity

The combined effect of CAP support to digitalisation on both economic and environmental performance of the farms can be approached through a sustainable productivity analysis. A quantitative productivity analysis builds on the assessment of the extent to which CAP support fostered digitalisation (described in Step 3) and goes deeper to evaluate the extent to which differences in the intensity of digitalisation between farms have an impact on farm standard or sustainable productivity. Measuring changes in sustainable productivity can be useful for assessing effectiveness and efficiency when combined with information about the corresponding costs.

For a holistic assessment of the simultaneous transition to digitalisation and environmental performance, evaluators may also follow a more sophisticated approach based on life cycle assessment (LCA). Such an analysis takes into account not only farm level and local environmental effects but also issues related to the manufacturing and end-of-life stages of the digital equipment.

The table below summarises how to approach this assessment.

Evaluation focus	Possible methods	What they help assess	Data needs/sources
Sustainable farm productivity	Quantitative productivity analysis; counterfactual impact assessments; correlation models; cost-effectiveness analysis where data allow	Whether digitalisation contributes to changes in standard or sustainable productivity, including economic performance, input efficiency and environmental performance	Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN)/FSDN; DME; farm-level data on digitalisation adoption and intensity; cost data; environmental indicators
Environmental and climate performance	Integration of Earth observation, IACS and FSDN data; rough greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation estimates; life cycle assessment (LCA) where relevant	Whether digital tools contribute to input reduction, climate and environmental monitoring, soil protection, biodiversity, carbon sequestration or lower emissions, while considering possible off-farm impacts of digital technologies	Earth observation (EO) data; Integrated administration and control system (IACS); FSDN; CAP monitoring data; emission/removal coefficients; technology-specific data; LCA data where available

For more details on how to assess CAP support to digitalisation on farm sustainable productivity, see the report referenced in Step 1. For a presentation of the key points for this assessment, see also this video, which is part of the webinar ‘Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans’.

Step 5 – Assess the effect of CAP support on digitalisation on sustainable and inclusive growth in rural areas

Digitalisation plays a pivotal role in advancing social sustainability, particularly in rural regions. By improving access to digital services, education and e-health, digitalisation helps bridge the urban-rural divide, empowering rural communities to take part in economic, social and civic life on more equal terms. Enhanced connectivity and equality in digital skills training foster social inclusion, reduce isolation and open pathways for youth engagement, innovation and local entrepreneurship. Digital tools also bolster vital public services, such as remote healthcare, digital public administration and online education, making rural living more viable and attractive for all generations.

Evaluation of the effect of CAP support for digitalisation on sustainable and inclusive growth in rural areas must, at least, capture:

the effect of CAP support on reducing the digital urban-rural divide but also gaps inside rural areas;
the effect of CAP support to digitalisation on improving access to services; and
the effect of CAP support to digitalisation on rural growth and employment.

The table below summarises how to approach this assessment.

Evaluation focus	Possible methods	What they help assess	Data needs/sources
Sustainable and inclusive growth in rural areas	Territorial analysis; disaggregated analysis by area or group; factors-of-success approach	Whether digitalisation is associated with improved rural service access, employment conditions, economic opportunities and territorial inclusion	Rural Observatory; information and communication technology (ICT)-use surveys; territorial indicators; employment and gross domestic product (GDP) data; impact indicators such as I.24 and I.25; local administrative data
Digital divide in rural areas	Three-level digital divide analysis: infrastructure, competency and outcome; territorial comparison	Whether support helps reduce gaps in connectivity, digital skills and the ability of rural actors to obtain meaningful benefits from digital tools	Connectivity data; digital skills indicators; ICT-use surveys; Rural Observatory; surveys of rural residents, businesses and service users
Access to rural services	Service-access analysis; user surveys; qualitative interviews or focus groups with rural actors	Whether digitalisation improves access to digital public services, e-health, online education, administrative services, advisory services or local marketplaces	Service availability and use data; administrative records; surveys of rural residents and businesses; qualitative evidence from local actors
Efficiency of rural digitalisation support	Data envelopment analysis or other efficiency analysis where comparable territorial data are available	How efficiently areas or programmes transform digitalisation inputs, such as funding, infrastructure or skills support, into outputs and outcomes such as service adoption or improved access	CAP support data; infrastructure and skills indicators; service uptake data; territorial output and outcome indicators
Institutional and contextual factors	Context analysis; correlation or network-based approaches, such as Gaussian graphical models, where data allow	How institutional quality, local capacity, governance, advisory support and structural characteristics influence digitalisation uptake and outcomes	Institutional quality indicators; local governance data; digital service adoption data; survey data; territorial and structural variables

For more details on how to assess the effect of CAP support in fostering digitalisation for the modernisation of agriculture and rural areas, see the report referenced in Step 1. For a presentation of the key points for this assessment, see also this video, which is part of the webinar “Identifying and assessing digitalisation under the CAP Strategic Plans”.

Step 6 – Consider administrative simplification

Administrative simplification should be considered both as a specific category and as a cross-cutting dimension of digitalisation.

This includes:

automated compliance systems;
reporting systems;
digital government service integration;
digital monitoring and verification tools.

Simplification may also occur whenever reporting, monitoring or compliance functions are integrated into operational systems. For example, a farm management information system may simultaneously support operational management, automated reporting, compliance verification and administrative burden reduction.

Digitalisation contributes most effectively to simplification when administrative functions are integrated into operational systems rather than treated as separate tasks.

Main takeaway points

Digitalisation should be assessed as a systemic transformation, not only as technology uptake.
Indicators alone are not sufficient to identify all relevant digitalisation support.
Surveys are often necessary to capture adoption, barriers, perceptions and behavioural factors.
Intervention descriptions should be reviewed and classified using the digitalisation classification system.
The classification system supports needs assessment, baseline setting, intervention logic, monitoring and evaluation.
Digitalisation intensity should be assessed through adoption, usage, sophistication and operational integration.
Sustainable productivity and rural-area effects are two key avenues for assessing the contribution of digitalisation.
Evaluations should focus on CAP contribution within a wider policy ecosystem, rather than direct attribution alone.

Learning from practice

Designing surveys to assess digitalisation intensity

The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre published a landmark survey-based report analysing the state of digitalisation in EU agriculture. The survey collected data from 1 444 farm respondents across nine Member States (Germany, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Lithuania, Hungary and Poland) between June and October 2024, using a combination of face-to-face and online methods. The survey covered the adoption of general IT tools and farm-specific technologies for crop and livestock production, perceived sustainability impacts, drivers and barriers to adoption, and farm-level data collection, management and sharing practices.

Dedicated surveys are important when existing data sources do not provide sufficient detail on actual technology use, digitalisation intensity, behavioural factors, perceived benefits, barriers or data governance issues.

Standardised surveys addressed to both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries can provide evidence on the breadth of adoption, depth of use and operational integration of digitalisation in farms and rural areas.

To ensure robust and comparable assessments, surveys should be designed around several methodological principles.

First, survey distribution should use trusted administrative or advisory platforms where possible. Established channels linked to CAP administration or advisory services can improve participation rates and help obtain a more representative sample.

Second, surveys should support the establishment of a baseline. Ideally, they should be conducted before and after the implementation of relevant interventions. If this is not possible, baseline information may be drawn from existing sources, including Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) indicators, the Rural Observatory, integrated farm statistics, ICT-use surveys or national datasets.

Third, questionnaires should be structured around a limited number of thematic blocks, including:

farm, business and respondent characteristics;
motivations and perceived benefits;
actual technology use;
information and advisory channels;
data governance;
support instruments.

Fourth, surveys should move beyond simple adoption questions and capture both the extent and frequency of technology use. The classification system can support this process by distinguishing different dimensions and levels of digitalisation across farming systems and rural activities.

Fifth, surveys should collect structural and managerial information necessary to explain differences in digitalisation intensity. Relevant variables may include farm or business size, specialisation, region, labour structure and the age, education and attitudes of farmers or managers.

Sixth, surveys should systematically address barriers to digitalisation. These may include investment and operating costs, expected economic returns, interoperability issues, data ownership, privacy and security concerns. Where relevant, questions may also cover expenditure on digital services, software subscriptions and depreciation of digital equipment.

Finally, surveys may include questions examining whether digitalisation has influenced production decisions, management practices or service delivery. Although this goes beyond measuring digitalisation intensity itself, it is important for understanding the wider effects of CAP interventions on farm productivity, environmental and climate performance, and sustainable and inclusive rural development.

Surveys should also consider the use of digital administrative tools linked to agricultural policy implementation. This can help assess the potential of digitalisation to simplify administrative procedures and reduce burdens for beneficiaries and public authorities alike.