European funding for the prevention of wildfires

European funding for the prevention of wildfires

The various European funds have been an important source of funding for Spain since our inception into the CEE in the mid-1980s. Modernization of infrastructure, transformation of the agricultural sector or support for job training are just some of the diverse issues for which European support has been and is a fundamental support for our country. Although to a lesser extent, the forestry sector is not outside this situation. Forest management and restoration efforts, generally tied to hydrological restoration, have been financed by the EARFD, though it is true that they are decreasing and will assume a smaller part of operational programs. Fire prevention activities have come from a singular entity or decades, first by FEOGA-Orientation and later by the EAFRD. Looking at this, it can be said that fire prevention continues to be a marginal element (this cannot be classified as a main element) within agricultural funds. (Spanish version)

Photo Tragsa

At the European level, every EU member state is assigned an EAFRD amount each financial period; currently we find ourselves in the 2014-2020 period, during which Spain has been allotted 8.297 billion euros. During this time, the amount is distributed amongst the seventeen regional and one national Programs for Rural Development (PRD). It is mandatory to add a percentage of national funding to this EAFRD money; the regional programs are mainly funded by the Spanish government, with less participation from the EU. The maximum percentage of co-financing from EAFRD is variable, following the level of development of the region and the project in question, between 85% and 53%.

The Regulation that presides over the EAFRD (Regulation EU 1305/2013) defines a series of measures and sub-measures, the majority centered on the agricultural sector, with others open as much to the agricultural as the forestry sector (training and advising for land owners, creation and grouping of products, investments in infrastructure…) and some exclusive to the forestry sector. For each program, the responsible administration decides which measures to include and the budget dedicated to them.

The Regulation establishes very general conditions for different types of forestry interventions, the so-called sub measures, that make up the forestry measure. One such sub measures is the prevention of damage caused to forests by wildfires, natural disasters and catastrophes. Spain adds a series of elements from the National Framework for Rural Development to these conditions, which is to be followed by each PRD. Instead of putting limitations, the Framework groups together issues that serve as requirements. This is done so that a document can be considered equivalent to a forestry management plan or compilation of work done.

Use of biomass for fire prevention, energy purposes and sustainable management of forests. Photo I. Muñoz

From now on, each administration will design their own program. They will decide if to include the forestry measure, how much money will go to the measure and which sub measures will be chosen. All eighteen Spanish programs currently include the forestry measure, with the prevention of damage being the only sub measure included in every program, giving an idea of its importance. Each administration develops a series of details that can be very different from one program to the next, as, for example, if the program will finance activities done by the administration or if it will be open to granting aid to individuals that apply for, the types of activities, the conditions so that these activities can be financed, the maximum amount in the case of grants for individuals, etc.

Once the program is designed, the European Commission has the last say. They can make observations and request modifications before giving their approval. Usually, forestry measures are not one of the issues with the greatest weight during negotiations for the approval of each PDR. As such, it is not uncommon for something to be approved for one program but vetoed in another. Without question, the initial generic support for fire prevention by EAFDR can create vastly different realities in each territory regarding how much this support means and what it produces.

Usually, forestry measures are not one of the issues with the greatest weight during negotiations for the approval of each PDR. As such, it is not uncommon for something to be approved for one program but vetoed in another. Without question, the initial generic support for fire prevention by EAFDR can create vastly different realities in each territory regarding how much this support means and what it produces.

Cattle and forest are compatible and complementary, although the pasture admissibility coefficient has reduced the presence of cattle under trees. Photo Ismael Muñoz

The sub measure regarding the prevention of wildfires usually includes a series of classic activities, included in a large or small part of almost all the PRDs, such as fire belts, firebreak areas, preventive forestry treatments, and large-scale preventive infrastructure (varying networks, lookout points, communications, water points, bases for aircraft and vehicles, etc.). Other types of actions, such as raising awareness or employing livestock for preventive purposes, are less common and only included in some programs.

An issue frequently debated is the admissibility by EAFRD in the acquisition of vehicles and machinery. Investments in equipment such as a bulldozer, which can be applied to prevention work, as well as suppression activity, are vetoed by the regulation and the Commission, whose criteria does not permit EAFRD to support fire suppression.

The scope of these preventive actions is limited, restricted to the largest areas of risk, and centered on interventions that facilitate suppression, due to the limited resources available and the physical impossibility of reaching the entire territory. The necessary changes in the landscape, that reduce the continuous amounts of combustible debris at a regional level rather than just in forests that receive treatments, must be addressed by actions that go beyond the current prevention approach. It is well known that the harvesting of forests is an easy and economical way to control the constant amount of forest debris, however, the EAFRD regulation and the European Commission put limitations on investments in production, so that the support for these forestry industries that generate a demand for products stick to the production of basic materials at a small scale.

The necessary changes in the landscape, that reduce the continuous amounts of combustible debris at a regional level rather than just in forests that receive treatments, must be addressed by actions that go beyond the current prevention approach. It is well known that the harvesting of forests is an easy and economical way to control the constant amount of forest debris, however, the EAFRD regulation and the European Commission put limitations on investments in production

On the other hand, they have restricted direct payments from the PAC to the raising of animals in the wild, through the so-called coefficient of the admissibility of pastures, excluding a good part of the forest surface area with tree or shrub coverage. This makes it so the ranchers that graze their animals in the wild will eventually need to search for other land where they can receive their subsidies or very well stop what they are doing, risking being penalized for their way of raising livestock. This way, the European funds´ support for fire prevention is only for urgent matters, like firebreak areas and water points, all while disregarding what is necessary.

For the next finance period 2021-2027, the form will change as there will be a singular national strategic plan instead of the eighteen current PDRs. Even though each autonomous community will continue to decide which actions to take in their territory and the budget destined for each, it is possible that the articulation of the measures in a singular document could result in better coherence amongst the distinct regions.

For the next finance period 2021-2027, the form will change as there will be a singular national strategic plan instead of the eighteen current PDRs. Even though each autonomous community will continue to decide which actions to take in their territory and the budget destined for each, it is possible that the articulation of the measures in a singular document could result in better coherence amongst the distinct regions.

A change that could be relevant in the new regulation is the absence of the definitions and conditions for specific measures. At this moment, there exists a great flexibility for forestry activities, and it will be each State that defines their limits, always submitted for the later approval by the Commission. An opportunity is presented here. The administrations at the autonomous community and national level can, together, decide on a strategic plan that promotes harvesting or they can just continue the current prevention model.

Equally, the quantitative weight of the forestry measures in total of the FEADER budget depends on the decisions that the Spanish administrations make. It is important to remark that rural development is not only agricultural, and that the role of the forest in some of the regions of the country more sparsely populated and depressed can be very important to assure them the future. Looking from a different angle, if they desire to accomplish the ambitious objectives of the Green Deal, they cannot put aside the forestry sector. A true change towards bio economics needs harvesting and production in our forests, which if adequately strengthened would be the necessary complement to the current prevention approach, allowing us to face the serious problem generated by landscape change and climate change all at once. The next European financial period is a great opportunity; we´ll see where it goes.

¹ ERDF: European Regional Development Fund.
² EAGGF: European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund. Disappeared and replaced as of 2007 by EAGF (European Agricultural Fund for Agricultural Guarantee) and EAFRD.
³ EAFRD: European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development.

Jorge Rodríguez López
Forest Technical Engineer and Degree in Environmental Sciences
Article published in the magazine Foresta, nº 77