General country description
A. First pillar: implementation of CAP reforms (2003)
B. Second pillar: implementation of RDP measures during 2007-2013
C. Vision for the CAP beyond 2013: a short overview of the debate (at Member State level) on future CAP reform
D. Literature, sources, references
The comparative analysis provides a compact overview of CAP implementation across all 27 Member States and their visions of the future of the CAP

General country discription

Comparison with EU-25

Population, 2005 (*1,000,000): 1.4

0.3% of population in EU-25

Population density, 2003 (inh./km2): 31

118 in EU-25

GDP/capita, 2005 (PPS): 12,800

55% of GDP/capita in EU-25

Share agriculture in total employment, 2002 (%): 7

5% in EU-25

Share Utilized Agricultural Area in total land area, 2003 (%): 20

46% in EU-25 in 1998

Average farm size, 2005 (ha): 57

19 in EU-15

Number of farms, 2005 (*1000): 13.4

0.2% of farms in EU-25

Source: own calculations based on Eurostat

Distribution of farming types, 2005 (% of total)

Source: own calculations based on Eurostat

EU funding for the Single Payment Scheme (SPS)
and the second pillar, 2007-2013

* Funding according to CAP budget including Bulgaria and Romania
Sources: Agra Europe (2007); CEU (2006); EC (2007a)


A. First pillar: implementation CAP reform (2003)

A.1 Single Payment Scheme


Implementation in 2009. SAPS (EC, 2007)

Coupling measures

no information

Reason for selection

no information

A.2 EU budget for Single Payment Scheme (SPS) per year (National ceiling) 2005-2013

Source: 2005: EC (2006); 2006-2013: CEU (2006) and Agra Europe (2007)

Tradability of SPS

No information

A.3 Cross-compliance: Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions (GAEC)

Source: Cross-Compliance in Central and Eastern European Countries

Selected standards of the GAEC

Comment (IEEP)

minimum level of maintenance

avoiding the encroachment of unwanted vegetation on agricultural land


grow crops on arable land or sow on abandoned land at least from 15-6 onwards or keep under black fallow, mechanical weed treatment on abandoned land; mow grassland and collect the hay at least once a year or graze before 31-7.

Estonia focuses on minimum level of maintenance by keeping the land under crops or grassland.

Reason for selection of cross compliance standards

No information

A.4 Further reform of market regulations

No information


B. Second pillar: implementation of RDP measures 2007-2013

B.1 Programme level and approval

There is one national RDP. The Rural Development Committee (consisting of representatives of the 27 Member States) has approved the RDP for Estonia on 21 November 2007.

B.2 Distribution of public budget over the axes (%) 1)

axis 1: competitiveness

axis 2: environment and land management

axis 3: rural economy

Axis 4: Leader





1) Figures excluding Technical Assistance
Source: Own calculations based on Põllumajandusministeerium (2007)

B.3 Integration of Leader in axes 1, 2 and 3

Leader contributes to Axes 1 and 2.

B.4 Local Action Groups (LAGs)

It is intended to create 27 LAGs in the coming programming period, covering about 40,000 km2 (Põllumajandusministeerium, 2007).

B.5 RDP budget 2007-2013 (million euros)

total public budget

% co-financing EAFRD1)

EAFRD budget

Contribution private sector

Total costs

National top-ups







1) % of co-financing may vary per axis
Source: Põllumajandusministeerium (2007)

B.6 Less Favoured Areas

Estonia has designed 350,000 ha as areas with handicaps and 38,000 ha as areas with environmental restrictions (Põllumajandusministeerium, 2007). In 2005, 40% of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) (338,000 ha) was classified as Less Favoured Area (LFA) (CEU, 2005).

B.7 Drivers of RDP strategy

No information


C. Vision on the CAP beyond 2013*

No information. However, the Minister of Agriculture believes that capping of single farm payments of large farms is unfair and could cause large holdings to split up in order to avoid aid caps (Agra Europe, 2008).

D. Literature, sources, references

Please send us your reaction