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): 10.1

2.2% of population in EU-25

Population density, 2003 (inh./km2): 109

118 in EU-25

GDP/capita, 2005 (PPS): 14,500

62% 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 (%): 65

46% in EU-25 in 1998

Average farm size, 2005 (ha): 26

19 in EU-15

Number of farms, 2005 (*1000): 155.4

2.4% of farms in EU-25

* The Eurostat-figures differ from the national statistics. As to agricultural figures these differences are considerable due to other definitions of farm and types of farms. The average farm size is according to Hungarian national statistics (2006) 3,5 ha. The number of agricultural enterprises is 7900 and the number of private farms is 707.000. 48% of the farmers produce for the market. Furthermore, the distribution of farm types differ considerable. According to the Hungarian statistics 24% of the farms are arable, 12% permanent crops,  1,41 % horticulture, 0,45 % dairy cattle, 0,1 % beef and mixed cattle, 2% sheep and goats, 5,3 % pigs, 4,45% poultry and mixed granivores, 15,2 mixed livestock, 12,7 mixed cropping, 17,1% crop and livestock. These figures considers 714 792 agricultural enterprises and private farms. Source: Agriculture in Hungary - Farm Typology published by Hungarian Central Statistical Office.

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

seperate sugar payments (EC, 2007)

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: IEEP, 2005

Selected standards of the GAEC

Summary of farmers’ obligations

Soil erosion

minimum soil cover

before spring sown crops if vulnarable for erosion


minimum land management reflecting site-specific conditions

countour tillage; row crops on slopes >12%; preserve uncultivated greenspaces


retain terraces


soil organic matter

arable stubble management

stubble ploughing, no burning

soil structure

appropriate machinery use

periodical deep tillage, number of operations on land as function of humidity of the soil

protection of permanent pastures


If pp decreases 10%, re-establishment of PP that has been converted to arable land is obligatory.

minimum level of maintenance

minimum livestock stocking rates or/and appropriate regimes

at least one clearing mowing per year. Grazing and mowing regimes accordingly to grassland types


retention of landscape features



avoiding the encroachment of unwanted vegetation on agricultural land

herbs or ligneous plants


EXTRA: agricultural land no longer in use

keep land tilled, ensure weed free status

Source: § Act 156/1994 issued by the Hungarian Ministry for Agriculture and Landscape management

Hungary pays attention to all issues of GAEC with several environmental standards.

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 Hungary on 20 September 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; axis 4 will be budgeted from axis 1-3 by 25-10-65%
Source: Own calculations based on Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development (2007)

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

Leader serves the realization of the objectives in Axis 1 and 2, but primarily those of Axis 3. The Leader program promotes the establishment of a number of LAGs that is larger compared to the previous program period. Axis 4 will create links among the various stakeholders of the rural economy via local communities. The objectives of Axis 3 will be present with the greatest emphasis in the Leader programme (Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development, 2007).

B.4 Local Action Groups (LAGs)

For the period of 2007-2013, the expected number of LAGs is 70, covering at least 35% of the rural population (Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development, 2007). In 2006, there were 72 LAGs, divided between 7 regions.*

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

total public budget

% co-financing EAFRD1)

EAFRD budget

Contribution private sector

Total costs

National top-ups


Non-convergence regions: 52 Convergence regions: 77





1) % of co-financing may vary per axis
Source: Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development (2007)

B.6 Less Favoured Areas

In 2005, 14% of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) (885,000 ha) was classified as Less Favoured Area (LFA) (CEU, 2005). According to other sources, 488,000 ha or 55% of the land was eligible for LFA payments, which differ by farm size and region.**

B.7 Drivers of RDP strategy

No information

* Information provided by Piroska Guzli, National Council in the Environment (OKT), Hungary.
** Ibid.


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, 2007b).

D. Literature, sources, references

Please send us your reaction