Search Evaluation Publications

Total results: 66.
TWG5

These non-binding Guidelines aim to examine the challenges in relation to the evaluation activities for the AIR in 2019 by:

  • Presenting practical approaches to estimate the RDP’s net contributions to the common CAP impact indicators and assess the progress in achieving the EU level objectives; 
  • Providing support for answering the common evaluation questions (CEQs) 22-30 and for reporting on evaluation findings to the European Commission in the AIRs submitted in 2019.

The Guidelines are structured in four parts (presented in three documents):

  • PART I (primarily for Managing Authorities): informs about the legal requirements and outlines how to report in 2019 on the CEQs 22-30. Part I contains references to other existing guidance. 
  • PART II (primarily for evaluators): offers methodological support for assessing the common impact indicators of Pilar II (sectoral, environmental and socio-economic impacts). This part explains each intervention logic, the use of additional evaluation elements, explains the data requirements, the units of assessment and guides the reader through choosing the most appropriate evaluation approaches for netting out the RDP’s contributions to the values of the CAP impact indicators. Furthermore, Part II also suggests approaches to assess RDP contributions towards achieving the EU 2020 strategy and innovation. 
  • PART III: contains the fiches for answering the CEQs 22–30.
  • PART IV: contains the technical annex including more detailed information on the approaches to assess the CAP impact indicators and the glossary of terms.

This study covers the evaluation of the ESI funds' implementation organizations in Sweden.

13 ESI fund programs in Sweden together contribute to the EU's 2020 goals. They work relatively well but the implementation can be developed, eg. through clearer prioritization among governing documents and through clearer description and consensus on how each program is expected to achieve its goals. Four different impact traces for impact have been identified. The so-called direct track is dominant in the marine and fisheries program and the rural development program. The power tracks are not in contrast to each other, but strategies and control need to be adapted to the respective tracks, both between and within the programs.

For the purpose of computing this indicator, field data collection activity has been undertaken on common bird species in agricultural habitats.

The project consists of the following elements:

a) Implementation of field counting of birds

b) the entry of field data in the database of "Monitoring of Common Birds of Agricultural Habitats in Croatia"

c) drawing up a Report on the Results of Counting Common Birds for 2017.

This report encompasses the calculation of the Farmland bird Index, i.e. the index of ‘common’ birds occurring in farmlands across Croatia for the year of 2017. The Farmland Bird Index (FBI) is one of the major baseline indicators measuring and assessing the influence of agricultural policies and practices on both natural habitats and species in the EU. For the first time the FBI has

been calculated for the Republic of Croatia and the year 2015 has been set as the reference year in which the FBI has by default been set to the value of 100. The development of index is thus being compared to the year of 2015 as baseline year.

In 2017, the formative thematic evaluation of the AECMs was conducted. It aimed to estimate the relevance and applicability of the RDP in Mayotte.
The results of the evaluation shed light on the Managing Authorities choices concerning the modifications of Measure 10 to be submitted to the European Commission in order to envisage the opening and the access of the AECMs to farmers of the territory in 2018.
The study evaluates both the overall mechanism of the AECMs and the operational character of the AECMs in Mayotte on an individual basis.
 

The report gives an overview of the measures related to Priorities 4 and 5 of the Estonian Rural Development Plan 2014-2020; The evaluation of the 'Animal Welfare' and Priority 2 'Stonewall' activities carried out.

The purpose of the evaluation is to examine the progress of the development plan in relation to its objectives, using results and, if necessary impact indicators; make suggestions for improvements of the development plan and thereby increase the quality of the implementation of grants.

  • The first chapter of the report provides an overview of the legal framework for evaluation, the implementation of measures, evaluation activities and evaluation notification.
  • The second chapter describes the agricultural land use of the area covered by area payments, including
    • separate nitrate sensitive area and land use of river basins.
  • The third chapter focuses on the details of the analysis of the measures.

This report focuses on ecosystem services and the benefits that people and society receive from nature in the form of goods and services, from food, drinking water and wood to climate regulation to recreation. Agriculture makes a positive contribution to various ecosystem services, but there are also negative effects of agriculture on ecosystem services.

The Rural Development Program 2014-2020 (PDPO III) focuses on improving the state of ecosystem services through various measures. The largest number of measures responds to biodiversity, regulation of water quality, preservation of soil fertility, regulation of the global climate and regulation of erosion risk.

In this report a screening of the agri-environment and climate measures of six European countries or regions: the Netherlands, Wallonia (Belgium), Lower Saxony (Germany), Nord-Pas de Calais (France), Scotland (United Kingdom) and Denmark. The rural development programme available is used for each Member State as a basis. Measures that pursue purely nature objectives are not taken into consideration.

The evaluation aims to obtaining an economic assessment of the activities and development opportunities for small and medium sized farms in Latvia, including direct payments and RDP contributions. It provides the analyis of the support conditions in the RDP measures and proposals for the development of these farms.

Pages