Wirtschaftliche und rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für die Anlage und Nutzung von Kurzumtriebsplantagen auf landwirtschaftlichen Flächen in Estland, Lettland und Litauen

ENThe demand for timber will rise over the prognosis timeframe of the next 15 years until 2030. For Europe, demand forecast shows a deficit of supply of 300 mio. m³ per year; one study even states the amount at 430 mio. m³. The growth of the world population in combination with a growing economy will further increase the demand for wood, despite the current situation of equilibrium between demand and supply as shown by figures regarding the actual wood production. The demand is driven by many factors. Long-term prognoses to the year 2030 predict a permanent rise in demand for energetic use, which is above the rise of wood for material use. The bio economic trend, including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through the gradual reduction of fossil energy sources as a primary energy supply, has been reinforced through the Paris Agreement, adopted by the international community in 2015 with the aim of climate protection. Also other factors will strengthen future demand: the tendency towards decentralised energy production, especially within municipalities, which will particularly grow the demand for fuel wood and weak assortments; the tendency towards reducing dependence on Russia as a supplier of natural gas and oil; and the substitution of fossil energy sources for wood in the production of chemicals and fuel. The EU sees in the forests of its member states a large standing wood supply, which would need to be activated to reach the goal of substituting 20% of primary energy with renewable energy sources by 2020. Wood production and use has a neutral CO2 footprint throughout its lifecycle; if produced sustainably, it only emits as much CO2 as it had previously bound within itself through photosynthesis.Increasing the use of timber in the energy mix reduces the pollution of the atmosphere with CO2 Forest-inventories like the recently published 3rd German National Forest Inventory underline this assumption of the EU regarding the reserves. However, not all of the stock in the forests can be activated, as some forests are taken out of production due to ecological and socio-economic reasons. Entrepreneurs whose business model is determined by the production of wood on agricultural land evaluate possible locations for the production of wood in short rotation according the political and legal security, the availability of resources and the factor prices. The Baltic States offer favorable preconditions. All three states fulfill the major parameters for wood production on coppices on agricultural land: protection of the liberal order; secured legal system with the protection of property; barrier-free access to the markets within the EU; no currency risks; favorable climatic conditions with sufficient precipitation; and large amounts of resources in land and labor. The classification as agricultural activity on agricultural land and as an agricultural permanent crop makes SRC principally entitled to EU funding programs through direct support, the so-called 1st pillar, as well as though the funding of the agricultural structures, the so-called 2nd pillar. SRC are included in the goal cluster of Europe2020/CAP2020. For the SRC farmers on a national level, the applicable legislation derived from the EU-regulations and their administrative interpretations are crucial. The environmental performance of SRC was especially recognised, while excluding them from the Greening-Commitment.Surprisingly however, SRC is recognised with the factor 0.3 as a substitute for the compulsory creation of ecological compensation conservation areas, whereas argoforest systems with a lower soil regeneration period are recognised with the factor 1. The SRC agriculturist can request an appeal proceeding only if he feels there are discrepancies between the administrative acting and the superior national laws or EU rules. In comparison to the funding of traditional agriculture with annual crops, interpretations were identified in both pillars which discriminate against SRC by diminishing it or excluding it all together. In the direct funding sector this is especially applicable to meliorated land. A detailed analysis has shown that the establishment of SRC on such land leads to the complete denial of direct funding, like in Latvia, or subjection to strict conditions which hinder any SRC, like in Estonia and Lithuania. This is significant because in Estonia roughly 54%, in Latvia roughly 62% and in Lithuania roughly 78% of agricultural land has a drainage system. Within the 2nd pillar, the SRC farmer is excluded from support, especially in granting subsidies for building construction, acquisition of machines and other equipment. The definition of the rotation periods is causing another hurdle. The production of wood on SRC is steered towards certain market segments, mainly fuel wood and weak assortments, through the predefined rotation periods within the different Baltic States. These are generally set to five years. Efforts to soften this restrictive rule have so far been unsuccessful. Further stimulus guiding towards certain segments comes from the subsidies provided for reforestation by the structural funding. [...] Keywords: SRC, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia.