Harmonization between the common agricultural policy and the natura 2000 network. A comparative analysis in Germany and Italy

Abstract

Agricultural practices and environmental protection as divergent or convergent issues? Agriculture and environmental preservation are indeed connected. Nevertheless, responsable institutions often treat these two issues as separated matters. This leads inevitably to a lack of harmonization between agricultural practices and environmental protection’s aims, which ultimately causes effects on the entire society (e. g. health diseases, biodiversity crisis or climate change). In the perspective of an increase of population and the ongoing urbanization, planners should consider territories in their integral meaning and should understand the mechanisms shaping them.

The analysis focuses on a comparative investigation of the two main European instruments for agriculture and environmental preservation, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the Natura 2000 network (N2K), in Germany and Italy. As a basis, the author proposes a wide multiple scale investigation from a planning perspective with an embedding of the “landscape approach” as background theory. The work begins with the definition of “landscape approach” and possible implementations in order to achieve social, economic and environmental objectives. Then the above-mentioned main EU tools affecting agriculture and environment are critically presented, with a focus on their characterizing features as well as reciprocal conflicts and synergies. The investigation proceeds with the implementation of these two European tools in different Member States, in this case Germany and Italy. From the above described macro-context, its local declination is built through the analysis of two case studies. From this level it is possible to investigate the impacts of these tools on the territory. The focus is on agricultural approaches in the Natura 2000 sites and their immediate surrounding with respect to conservation objectives. The aim is to understand the conflicts and synergies between the tools and their implementation as well as the complexity of the involved actors with their specific interests. The gained knowledge of the weaknesses and strengths characterizing the mentioned tools leaves space for brief proposals of improvement.