F

© Prostock-studio - stock.adobe.com

Agricultural Market Brief N°20

Organic farming
in the EU
A decade of organic growth
January 2023
 © Natalia Lisovskaya - stock.adobe.com
CONTENTS

Highlights 3

Factsheet 4

1. Facts and figures on organic farming in the EU 5

2. Sustainability of the organic sector 9

2.1 Economic sustainability 10

2.2 Environmental impact 16
2.3 Social sustainability 18

3. Organic sales 19

4. Imports on the rise 22

5. Matching the Green Deal ambition with EU support 24

6. Research and innovation 29

HIGHLIGHTS
Organic farming is an agricultural method to produce food and feed using natural substances and
processes. Its key contribution to a more sustainable agriculture is acknowledged in the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP). An action plan for the development of organic production in the EU was
adopted in 2021 [a] to support both production and consumption, and to further enhance
sustainability, in line with the European Green Deal, the Farm to Fork Strategy [b] and the Biodiversity
Strategy.
Data available on EU production and consumption of organic food show a growing trend in the
2010-2020 decade. With 14.8 million ha in 2020, the area under organic farming represented 9.1%
[c]
of the total EU agricultural land and close to 20% of the area under organic farming in the world.
The largest share was dedicated to permanent grassland (42%), followed by green fodder (17%),
cereals (16%), and permanent crops, such as fruit, olives and vineyards (11%). Despite significant
growth, EU organic animal production accounts for a small share of total EU animal production,
between 1% and 7% depending on the sector. On average, organic farms are bigger than
conventional farms and run by younger farm managers.
The environmental, economic and social benefits of organic farming are shown by data from the EU
Farm Accountancy Data Network and meta-analyses of scientific research, with results varying
significantly across sectors and Member States. For instance, organic arable crop farms save 75-
100% on plant protection product costs per hectare and 45-90% on fertiliser costs per hectare
compared to conventional farms, and they generate a higher or similar income per working unit.
On average, despite lower yields, organic farms generate a similar or higher income per worker
thanks to higher prices and higher levels of EU support, stemming mainly from the CAP, with a
range of approaches across Member States in their strategic plans.
Compared to 2015, the EU organic retail sales almost doubled in 2020, and the area under organic
farming grew by 41%. Imports from non-EU countries, in particular tropical fruit, increased between
2018 and 2021. Measures under the organic action plan and the CAP aim at sustaining growth,
which may be affected by economic developments such as food inflation affecting EU consumers’
purchasing power, and therefore demand for organic products.
Organic farming is a knowledge-intensive, rather than input-intensive, form of agriculture.
Therefore, research and innovation are key tools for boosting organic farming. Support is provided
under the EU research and innovation framework programmes Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe
(2014-2020 and 2021-2027), and the CAP’s agricultural European innovation partnerships EIP-
AGRI.

[a]
European Commission, ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions on an Action Plan for the Development of Organic Production’, COM (2021)141 final, European Commission, Brussels, 2021.
[b] European Commission, ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions – A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system’, COM (2020)381 final, European
Commission, Brussels, 2020.
[c] This annual evolution is based on annual organic crop statistics (based on data collected through the organic certifying bodies), which differs from data
collected for the farm structure survey (through national statistical institutes, directly from farms), available every 10 years. The latter depicts a lower level
of agricultural area under organic farming in 2020 (8.3%), but a stronger increase from 2010 (+119%). As of 2025, data to monitor the annual area under
organic farming will be collected and reported under the regulation on statistics on agricultural input and output.

3
4
 © © pixdeluxe – istockphoto

The share of EU agricultural land under organic farming increased by

1. Facts and figures on more than 50% in 2012-2020, with an annual increase of 5.7%.
During that period, the share of the land under organic farming
organic farming in the EU increased in all EU countries except Poland (where it started to grow
again in 2019 after several years of decline).
A growing area Graph 1.2 – Land under organic farming, area in 2012 and 2020 (million ha), and
In 2020, 74.9 million ha of agricultural land were farmed share of the UAA in 2020 (%), in main producing countries and sum of the other
organically in the world (including the area under conversion towards Member States
organic farming) 1. The EU area under organic farming reached 3.0 30
14.8 million ha in 2020 2, which was 19.7% of the total in the world 2.5 25
and 9.1% of the EU’s utilised agricultural land (UAA).

Organic share (%)

2.0 20
million ha

Graph 1.1 – Evolution of the share of EU agricultural area under organic farming,
2012-2020 (%) 3 1.5 15
10 9.1
8.5 1.0 10
8.0
7.1 7.5
8 6.6 0.5 5
5.9 5.9 6.1
6 0.0 0
FR ES IT DE AT SE CZ EL PL RO other
4 2012 2020 Organic share 2020
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data table org_cropar).
2
The four countries with the largest area under organic farming in the
0 EU are France, Spain, Italy and Germany, with 52% of the total in
2012 and 59% in 2020. France in particular increased its area under
organic farming by almost 150% since 2012, while Italy almost
doubled it.
Source: Eurostat (online data table org_cropar). Data for France 2020 is
provisional. Includes land fully converted and under conversion. In 2020, France became the EU country with the largest area of land
under organic farming with 2.5 million ha and an average annual
growth of 11.8% in 2012-2020. Spain, which had the largest area
under organic farming in 2012, came close with 2.4 million hectares.
1 FiBL & IFOAM – ‘Organics international The world of organic agriculture – Regarding the share of the utilised agricultural area under organic
Statistics & emerging trends 2022’, Organic World Publishing, Frick, farming, compared to the EU average of 9.1%, in 2020 it reached
Switzerland, 2022, 22 pp, https://www.fibl.org/fileadmin/documents/shop/ more than 25% in Austria, and was above 20% in Estonia and
1344-organic-world-2022.pdf.
Sweden. However, in Ireland and Malta, the figure remained below
2 Eurostat (online data table org_cropar)
3 This annual evolution is based on annual organic crop statistics (based on data 2%.
collected through the organic certifying bodies), which differs from data
collected for the farm structure survey (through national statistical institutes,
directly from farms), available every 10 years. The latter depicts a lower level
of agricultural area under organic farming in 2020 (8.3%), but a stronger
increase from 2010 (+119%). As of 2025, data to monitor the annual area
under organic farming will be collected and reported under the regulation on
statistics on agricultural input and output.

5
The area under conversion from conventional to organic farming 4 Germany (together accounting for almost half of the EU’s organic
provides an indication of the potential growth in the organic sector in permanent grassland). Other parts of organic farming land are
the coming years. In 11 EU countries, the share of the area under devoted to green fodder (17%), cereals (16%) and permanent crops,
conversion accounts for between 10% and 20% of the total area such as fruit, olives and vineyards (11%).
under organic farming and, in 6 countries, it exceeds 20%. Two thirds
of the hectares under conversion are in France, Spain, Italy and The share of the area under organic farming compared to the total
Romania. area per crop is above the EU average of 9.1% for dry pulses (24%),
permanent crops (14%), green fodder (13%), permanent grassland
Map 1.1 - Area under conversion to organic, 2020 share of total area under
(12%) and vegetables (11%). Cereals and industrial crops are below
organic farming (%), by country
the average: 5% and 4%, respectively. Nevertheless, they registered
high annual growth rates in 2014-2020 (respectively +8% and
+15%).
Graph 1.4 - Organic land use, share in 2020 and annual growth rate 2014-2020,
by crop (%)
25

20 15
15 11
9
10 6 7 6
5

Organic share Annual growth rate

Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data tables org_cropar and
apro_cpsh1).

Organic animal production remains small

Despite fast growth, EU organic animal production remains small in
comparison to the EU total. In 2020, about 6.0% of the cattle herd
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data table org_cropar). and 7.2% (2019) of the sheep and goat flocks were estimated to be
organically raised, while for poultry and pigs this was estimated at
Grassland is the main land use category
3.6% and 1.0%, respectively. Extensive grass-fed systems for cattle,
Graph 1.3 – Land use of conventional and organic agriculture, 2020, by crop (%) sheep and goats can be easier and cheaper to convert into organic. By
contrast, this conversion is more complex for grain-fed systems due
8% 6% to higher organic feed expenses and stricter rules (e.g. in relation to
7% 11% Others
animal medication). Nevertheless, albeit from a lower basis, organic
Permanent Crops pig and poultry production show higher annual growth rates (9 and
30%
11%, respectively) than other animal production.
42% Permanent Grassland
Graph 1.5 – Organic animal production, share in 2020 and annual growth rate
12% Green fodder
2014-2020, by animal production category (%)
8%
1% Industrial crops
17% 15
4% Dry Pulses 11
34% 3% 12
16%
9
Cereals
9
Conventional Organic 6
6 5
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data tables org_cropar
and apro_cpsh1). 3
In 2020, the largest share of the EU area under organic farming was 0
permanent grassland, with 42% and 6.2 million ha. This area is used Cattle Pigs Poultry Sheep &
for organic livestock (for both meat and dairy), which requires access Organic share Annual growth rate goats
to outdoor grazing areas, and is mostly located in Spain, France and Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data tables org_lstspec,
apro_mt_lscatl, apro_mt_lspig, apro_mt_lssheep, apro_mt_lsgoat, apro_mt_pann and
ef_lsk_poultry). DG AGRI estimate for poultry and goats. The share of sheep and goats
4 Any farm that wishes to produce organically has to undergo a process known refers to 2019.
as 'conversion'. During this period, organic production methods need to be used
but the resulting product cannot be sold as organic. The length of this
conversion period depends on the type of organic product being produced.

6
High shares of organic livestock were registered in some countries, for a significant share of production in Sweden (20%), Austria (17%)
e.g. Austria (22% of cattle, 35% of sheep and goats and 3% of pigs), and Denmark (13%). Half of all EU organic milk is used as drinking
Sweden (24% of cattle, 32% of sheep and goats and 3% of pigs), milk whereas cheese production uses 26%.
Denmark (15% of cattle and 3% of pigs) and Latvia (26% of cattle,
36% of sheep and goats and 1% of pigs). Graph 1.8 – Production of organic dairy products, volume (thousand tonnes milk
equivalent) 2020, main producing countries
Graph 1.6 – Organic cattle, number of heads in 2014 and 2020 (thousands), and
share in 2020 (%), in main producing countries
1000 30
800
700
800 25
600

Organic share (%)

20 500
Cattle (1000)

600
15 400
400 300
10
200
200 5 100
0 0 0
DE FR AT IT SE CZ DK ES EL BE LV PT FR DE NL DK SE
2014 2020 Organic share 2020 Cheese Butter
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data tables org_lstspec and Acidified milk (yoghurts and other) Cream
apro_mt_lscatl). Drinking milk
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data table org_aprod). Data are not
More than half of EU organic cattle are raised in Germany, France, available for all countries.
Austria and Italy. In 2014-2020, organic cattle numbers grew fastest
in Bulgaria, Croatia and Greece. Romania and Poland are the only EU Organic farms bigger on average than conventional
countries where organic cattle decreased in number. farms
Graph 1.7 – Production of organic milk, volume in 2014 and 2020 (thousand Based on data from the 2020 Integrated Farm Statistics[5], 2.7% of
tonnes), and share in 2020 (%), main producing countries EU agricultural holdings have agricultural land and/or livestock that is
1 400 28 fully organic or under conversion. An additional 0.9% of farms have
some organic production. Therefore, overall, 3.6% of EU farms are
1 200 24
organic or partially organic. This share is very different from one
Milk production (1000 t)

1 000 20 country to another: it is highest in Austria (22%), Czechia (18%),

Organic share (%)

800 16 Estonia (16%), France (11%) and Finland (11%). It is around only 1%
in Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Poland, Portugal and Romania. In absolute
600 12
terms, the highest number of EU organic producers is located in Italy
400 8 (corresponding to 9% of Italian holdings), followed by France (11%)
200 4 and Spain (4%).

0 0 At EU level, the share of land farmed by fully or partially organic

DE FR DK AT IT SE NL holdings is higher than the share of fully or partially organic holdings.
2014 2020 share organic milk in 2020 This is due to the fact that, on average, the size of organic farms
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (online data tables org_aprod and (41 ha) is larger than the size of conventional farms (16 ha, 2.5 times
apro_mk_farm), provisional data for Italy. less). Organic farms are larger than conventional ones in the majority
Three quarters of EU organic milk is produced in Germany, France, of Member States, with the largest difference in Lithuania, Portugal
Denmark, Austria and Italy. The two leading EU producers, Germany and Slovakia (4 to 7 times larger). However, organic and conventional
and France, significantly increased their volume between 2014 and farms are of similar size in Germany and Ireland, and organic farms
2020: +74% and +115% respectively. Nevertheless, growth was even are 20 to 40% smaller in Bulgaria, Czechia, France, and Luxemburg.
more remarkable in relative terms in Bulgaria, Greece, Spain and Most fully organic farms are specialised in cattle-rearing and
Cyprus. On the other hand, downward trends were registered in fattening (14% of EU organic holdings), general arable crops (13%),
Estonia, Hungary and Poland (although Poland has started to recover and olives (10%). On average, organic farms are bigger than their
in 2020). conventional counterparts in all types of farming.
Despite the increase in organic milk production in most EU countries,
the share of organic milk in total milk production is still small: 3.7% in
the EU in 2020. However, there are exceptions: organic milk accounts

7
Graph 1.9 -Average size of conventional and fully organic holdings (in hectares) in the EU in 2020

120

100

80

60

40

20

Conventional Organic

Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat (Integrated Farm Statistics, 2020, preliminary data, specific extraction). 5

© Syda Productions - stock.adobe.com

5
Source: Eurostat, Integrated Farm Statistics, 2020, preliminary data, specific extraction https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-manuals-and-guidelines/-/ks-gq-20-009.

8
 © rh2010 - stock.adobe.com

On the other hand, organic plant production farms are more labour
2. Sustainability of the intensive in some sectors (they require more workers per unit of
economic output). Overall, organic plant production farms generate a
organic sector higher or similar level of income per worker.
Regarding animal production farms, organic dairy farms have lower
Organic production brings environmental, economic veterinary costs per output unit than conventional farms. Both organic
and social benefits dairy and beef farms are more labour intensive, but they generate
more income per worker. Organic farms raising sheep and goats also
Data from the EU Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) 6 show that tend to have higher income per worker than their conventional
organic plant production farms spend less on fertilisers and plant counterparts. Organic granivore farms also have lower veterinary
protection products than conventional farms. Organic arable crop costs per unit of economic output.
farms save 75-100% on plant protection product costs per hectare
and 45-90% on fertiliser costs per hectare compared to conventional Table 2.2 – Input costs per unit of economic output, income per worker and
farms. labour per unit of economic output in organic versus conventional animal
production farms in selected countries 8
Table 2.1 – Input costs per unit of economic output, income per worker, and
labour per unit of economic output in organic versus conventional plant Veterinary costs Income Labour per
per output unit per worker output unit
production farms in selected countries 7
Fertilisers Pesticides Milk (dairy cows) Lower Higher a Higher b
Income per Labour per
costs costs
worker output unit Beef (beef only and
per output unit per output unit No clear trend Higher Higher c
Cereals, beef-dairy combined)
oilseeds, Significantly Significantly Significantly
No clear trend Sheep and goats No clear trend Higher d No clear trend
and protein lower lower higher
crops
Granivores (poultry,
Other arable Significantly Significantly Lower No clear trend No clear trend
Higher a Higher pigs and others)
crops lower lower
Source: Based on EU FADN - 2017-2020 data (2020 preliminary data).
Wine Lower b Lower No clear trend No clear trend a
Exceptions: slightly lower in 4 out of 27 country x economic size combinations.
b
Exceptions: slightly lower in 4 out of 27 country x economic size combinations.
Fruit No clear trend Lower c No clear trend Higher d c
Exceptions: slightly lower in 7 out of 26 country x economic size combinations.
d
Exception: slightly lower in 1 out of 9 country x economic size combinations.
Source: Based on EU FADN - 2017-2020 data (2020 preliminary data).
a
Exceptions: slightly lower in 3 out of 14 country x economic size combinations.
b
Exceptions: slightly higher in 2 out of 8 country x economic size combinations.
c
Exception: slightly higher in 1 out of 8 country x economic size combinations
d
Exceptions: slightly lower in 2 out of 8 country x economic size combinations

6 EU FADN data is based on a sample of about 80 000 farms, which is

8
representative of EU farming in terms of farm types, regions and economic Only the combinations of country and economic size for which there are
size, but is not representative of organic farms, which limits the analysis minimum of 30 farms in the FADN sample over the period 2017-2020 are
potential of FADN data. https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions included.
/FADNPublicDatabase/FADNPublicDatabase.html Milk (dairy cows): AT (3 economic sizes), BE (1), CZ (1) DE (4), DK (2), FI (1), FR
7
Only combinations of country and economic size for which there are at least (1), IT (4), LV (4), NL (1), PL (3), SE (2).
30 farms in the FADN sample over the period 2017-2020 are included. Cattle (rearing and fattening, rearing-fattening-dairying combined excluding
Cereals, oilseeds and protein crops: AT (2 economic sizes), DE (2), FR (1), IT (3). milk specialists): AT (3), BE (1), CZ (4), DE (3), FI (1), FR (2), IT (3), LV (1), PL (2),
Other arable crops: AT (2), DE (4), FR (1), IT (5), PL (2). SE (3), SI (2), SK (1).
Wine: DE (1), FR (3), IT (4) Sheep and goats: AT (1), FR (3), IT (4), HR (1).
Fruit: AT (1), DE (1), FR (1), IT (4), PL (1). Granivores (pigs, poultry, various granivores): DE (1), DK (2), IT (2), FR (1).

9
 © ellisia - stock.adobe.com

2.1 Economic sustainability: a with an organic yield ranging between 50% (Germany) and 83%
(Italy) of conventional yields. The gap for organic maize is lower but
sector economically attractive may still represent a strong financial disincentive if not compensated
by higher prices and/or lower costs and/or public support
for farmers
Higher producer price premium 10 levels are registered for common
FADN data for arable crops farms, dairy farms, and beef farms wheat, with an organic wheat price around twice as high as
(where the organic farm sample size in FADN is large enough to conventional wheat in Germany, Austria and France (after 2017). In
provide relevant results in several countries) show that organic 2020, there was a slight decrease in the premium in all countries
farmers benefit from a price premium for their products in the arable analysed, following an increase in the price of conventional common
crops and dairy sectors, but not in the beef sector. These data also wheat.
show that costs per unit of land or animal can be lower in organic
systems, although this is not always the case. In most cases, the level Graph 2.2 – Premium on producer price for organic common wheat
of income per worker is higher in organic farms, and the share of (conventional=100), in 2015-2020 in selected countries
public support in overall farm income is also higher than in 300
conventional production systems.
250
Arable crop farms
200
Graph 2.1 – Organic yields compared to conventional yields for selected arable
crops, average 2015-2020 (conventional yields = 100)
150
100
100
80
50
60 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

IT AT DE FR PL
40
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.
20
Organic arable crop farms in Poland, Italy and Austria had lower
0 average costs per hectare in 2015-2020 than conventional farms in
Wheat Maize those countries, while these costs were higher on organic farms in
France and Germany compared to their conventional counterparts.
IT AT DE FR PL
Among the different cost categories 11, lower specific crop costs are
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary. Data on organic maize yield not available for
Poland because the sample size is too small.
10 Percentage by which organic products’ producer price exceeds (or falls short
According to a review of meta-analyses commissioned by DG of) conventional products price.
11 Specific crop costs include seeds and seedlings, fertilisers, crop protection, and
Agriculture and Rural Development to the Joint Research Centre 9, crop
other specific costs related to crop production.
yields in organic production are 5-30% lower than in conventional Non-specific costs include motor fuel and lubricants, machines and building
production. Based on FADN data on farms specialised in arable crop upkeep, contract work, energy (electricity, heating fuels), and other direct costs
production, the yield gap is particularly significant for common wheat, (water, insurance, accountancy fees, telephone charges, etc.).
Depreciation (consumption of capital assets) is a systematic allocation of a
depreciable amount of an asset over its useful life. It applies to fixed assets:
9 European Commission, iMAP (Integrated Modelling platform for Agro-economic farm buildings, machinery and equipment, land improvements, permanent
and resource Policy analysis), https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/display/IMAP/. plantations, and intangible non-tradable assets.

10
the primary driver for lower total costs in organic farms (Poland, Italy similar, while organic farms in France receive a third less in subsidies
and Austria). Similarly, when total costs were higher, specific costs per worker than conventional farms.
were lower (Germany) or the relative increase in specific costs was
Looking at the share of subsidies in income, organic arable crop farms
lower than that of non-specific costs or depreciation costs (France).
were more reliant on public support for their income than
Graph 2.3 – Costs for conventional and organic arable crop farms, average conventional farms in three Member States (Germany, Italy and
2015-2020 (EUR/ha) in selected countries particularly Poland). In France, however, organic farms are more
2000 autonomous than conventional farms in terms of generating their
income.
1500 In conclusion, organic arable crop farms face quite different situations
in terms of yield gap, premium on producer price and costs per
1000
hectare across Member States. Together with differences in public
support, this leads to mixed trends in the total income per worker
500
when comparing conventional and organic farms.
0 For instance, although the income per worker from farm production in
Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic
Italy and Germany is similar between conventional and organic farms,
the reasons for this similarity are different. On one hand, organic
farms in Germany have a significant yield gap and similar costs to
DE AT FR IT PL
Specific costs Non-specific costs Depreciation conventional farms, but this is compensated for by a strong premium
on producer prices. On the other hand, organic farms in Italy have a
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.
lower premium but a smaller yield gap than in Germany, and they
In terms of average annual farm net value added per annual work also have lower costs than conventional farms in Italy.
unit (AWU) for 2015-2020, organic arable crop farms had (i) a higher
total income in Austria, Germany and Italy (ii) a similar income in Similarly, even though organic farms in France and Austria both make
France, and (iii) a lower income in Poland compared to conventional around 40% more income from their production compared to
farms. conventional farms, the total income in Austria is much higher in
organic farms than conventional farms due to greater public support.
In Italy and Germany, income from farm production 12 per worker is In France, lower public support per worker leads to similar total
similar between conventional and organic farms, while organic farms income for organic and conventional farms.
in Austria and France earn around 40% more from their production.
Organic farms in Poland gain very little from farm production, and Despite lower costs, organic farms in Poland suffer from the absence
much less than their conventional counterparts. of a premium on producer prices to compensate for the significant
yield gap. The same support level per worker for organic and
Graph 2.4 – Farm net value added per worker for conventional and organic conventional farms does not compensate for the lower income from
arable crop farms, average 2015-2020 (thousand EUR/AWU) in selected farm production in organic farms.
countries and proportion of public support in total farm net value added
Dairy farms
60 100
90 Based on FADN data on farms specialised in dairy production, milk
50 80
70 yields are lower by 8-33% on organic farms than on conventional
subsidies (%)

40
60 farms.
30 50
40 Graph 2.5 – Organic yields compared to conventional yields for dairy cows,
20 30
20 average 2015-2020 (conventional yields = 100)
10
10
0 0 100
Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

80

DE AT FR IT PL 60
Farm production Subsidies Proportion of subsidies
40
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.

Organic arable crop farms in Germany, Austria, and Italy receive 20

around 50% more subsidies per worker than conventional farms 13.
Subsidies per worker on organic and conventional farms in Poland are 0

AT DE DK FR SE LV PL NL

Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary

https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/FADNPublicDatabase/description.html. FADN data on dairy farms from selected EU countries show a

12
Income from farm production includes the output made from selling the
premium on producer price for organic milk of more than 20%, after a
products on the market, the differences in stocks, farmhouse consumption,
etc. drop in 2017 following an increase in the price of conventional milk
13 Income from subsidies includes EU CAP and national public support, but (Poland and Latvia are an exception, with no premium in either
excludes support on investment. country).

11
Graph 2.6 – Premium on producer price for organic milk (conventional=100), organic farms than in conventional ones. In Latvia, organic dairy
2015-2020 in selected countries farms actually lose money from the farming activity itself.
180 In all Member States studied, the subsidies received per worker were
higher in organic dairy farms than in conventional ones, except in
160
Poland, the level of subsidy was similar. Organic dairy farms were
140 more reliant on public support for their income than conventional
farms, especially in Latvia, Poland, and Germany.
120
Graph 2.8 – Farm net value added per worker for conventional and organic dairy
100
farms, average 2015-2020 (thousand EUR/AWU) in selected countries and
80 proportion of public support in total farm net value added
60 120 120
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 100 100
DK DE FR AT 80 80

subsidies (%)
SE LV PL NL 60 60
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary. 40 40
Organic dairy farms in Denmark, Sweden, Austria, and Germany had 20 20
higher average costs per livestock unit in 2015-2020 compared to 0 0
conventional farms, while in the other Member States studied, these -20 -20

Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
costs were (slightly) lower (Latvia, Poland, France, Netherlands) on
organic farms.
Among the different cost categories, lower specific livestock costs 14 DK NL SE DE FR AT LV PL
are the primary driver for lower total costs in organic farms in Latvia, Farm production Subsidies Proportion of subsidies
Poland, France, and the Netherlands. Similarly, lower specific costs
Source: EU-FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.
compensate partially for the higher non-specific and depreciation
costs on organic farms in Germany. In Austria and Sweden, the stable In conclusion, organic dairy farms face quite different situations in
or only slightly higher specific costs act to reduce the overall effect of terms of yield gap, premium on producer price and costs per hectare
the stronger increase in non-specific and depreciation costs on in various Member States. Together with differences in public support,
organic farms. Specific costs on organic farms in Denmark are higher this leads to mixed trends in the total income per worker when
to the same extent as other costs on these farms. comparing conventional and organic farms.
Graph 2.7 – Costs for conventional and organic dairy farms, average 2015-2020 The organic farms in Member States with the smallest milk yield gap
(EUR/Livestock unit) in selected countries (Denmark, Sweden, and, to a lesser extent, Austria and the
3500 Netherlands) were the ones that had a positive gap in income from
3000 farm production compared to conventional farms. This was the case
2500 even though organic farms in three of these Member States
(Denmark, Sweden, and Austria) were also the ones with the highest
2000
relative costs compared to their conventional equivalents (the
1500
premium on producer price is quite close in these four countries).
1000
500 On the other hand, organic farms in two Member States with a larger
0 milk yield gap (France and Germany) had a slightly negative gap in
income from farm production compared to conventional farms.
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic

Organic farms in France have slightly lower costs than conventional

ones, and a premium on producer price around the same level as
DK NL SE DE FR AT LV PL Denmark, Sweden, Austria and the Netherlands. The premium on
Specific costs Non-specific costs Depreciation producer price is the highest of all Member States in Germany, but
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.
organic farms there also have slightly higher costs than conventional
In terms of average annual farm net value added per annual work farms. Public support in Germany and France compensates for most
unit for 2015-2020, organic dairy farms had a higher total income of the gap in income from farm production, thereby leading to a total
than conventional farms in Denmark, Sweden, Austria, and the income that is only slightly lower in organic farms than in
Netherlands; an almost similar income in France and Germany; and a conventional ones (-2% for organic farms in France, and -5% in
lower income in Poland and Latvia. Germany).

Organic dairy farms in Denmark, Austria, the Netherlands, and Despite having lower costs per animal, organic dairy farms in Latvia
Sweden earned (slightly) more income per worker from farm and Poland suffer from the combination of a large yield gap and
production compared to conventional farms. In Poland, Germany, and receiving no premium on their prices. This leads to a much lower
France, income from farm production is (much) lower per worker in income from farm production in organic farms.

14 Specific livestock costs include feedstuffs and other livestock specific costs
(such as veterinary fees, reproduction costs, milk tests, storage, etc.),
https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/FADNPublicDatabase/description.html.

12
Beef farms In terms of average annual farm net value added per annual work
unit for 2015-2020, organic beef farms had a higher total income in
FADN data on beef farms from selected EU countries show that, in all Member States compared to conventional farms, except in Poland
general, the producer price for organic cattle intended for meat (same total income) and Belgium (lower income for organic farms).
production was 5-30% lower than the price for conventional cattle,
except for Sweden in 2015-2018. This lower producer price for In all Member States studied except Slovenia, the income per worker
organic animals may be explained by the fact that, under the organic from farm production was lower in organic farms than in conventional
system, cattle usually reach classes of conformation and fat cover 15 farms, with sometimes major differences (e.g. in Germany and
that receive – proportionally – a lower price per kilogram of carcass Belgium). On the other hand, the income per worker from subsidies
weight. However, recent market data 16 suggest that organic cattle of was consistently higher in organic farms than in conventional farms.
the same age class, sex, conformation and fat cover are, in most Poland and Austria had the smallest difference (around +40% income
cases, sold at a higher price than their conventional counterparts. from subsidies per worker for organic farms), while Germany had the
highest (+135%). The difference in the other Member States studied
Graph 2.9 – Premium on producer price for organic beef 1–2-year-old male was between +60 and +75%.
bovines (conventional=100), 2015-2020 in selected countries
On average, both conventional and organic beef farms tend to be
130 more reliant on public support for their income than arable crop farms
120 or dairy farms. In several Member States, subsidies were needed to
110 cover part of the costs. Organic farms were more dependent on public
support for their income than conventional farms in all countries
100 studied, except Slovenia.
90
Graph 2.11 – Farm net value added per worker for conventional and organic beef
80 farms, average 2015-2020 (thousand EUR/AWU) in selected countries and
70 proportion of public support in total farm net value added
60 50 200
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 40 160
BE CZ DE SE 30 120
AT PL IT SI

subsidies (%)
20 80
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.
10 40
Organic beef farms in Poland, Italy, Germany and Czechia had
0 0
average costs per livestock unit that were lower by a fifth to a quarter
compared to conventional farms. These costs were also slightly lower -10 -40
in Belgium, although they were (slightly) higher in Austria and -20 -80
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Slovenia. In all Member States studied, specific costs per organic
livestock unit were lower by between 6 and 60% compared to
conventional ones. IT DE SE BE CZ AT SI PL
Farm production Subsidies Total income Proportion of subsidies
Graph 2.10 – Costs for conventional and organic beef farms, average 2015- Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary. Proportion of subsidies for conventional beef
2020 (EUR/Livestock unit) in selected countries farms in Slovenia: 349%.
2500 In conclusion, organic beef farms face quite different situations in
2000 terms of premium on producer price and costs per livestock unit
across Member States. Together with differences in ‘yield’ (classes of
1500 conformation and fat cover) and public support, this leads to mixed
1000 trends in the income per worker when comparing conventional and
organic farms.
500
0
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic

IT DE SE BE CZ AT SI PL
Specific costs Non-specific costs Depreciation
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.

15
The classes of conformation and fat cover are a quantitative indicator of the
‘meatiness’ of a carcass. They can be interpreted as an equivalent to the
concept of yield in the arable crop or dairy sectors. © JENOCHE - stock.adobe.com
16 Notifications of the Member States to the European Commission in the context
of the Market Transparency Regulation (data for AT, CZ, DE, FR and SE, year
2022).

13
 Focus on specific Member States

The successful example of Austria Based on FADN data for specialised farms, the premium on producer
prices for organic wheat in Poland is very modest. This is unlike other
Austria leads the EU’s organic ranking in the share of agricultural land countries, where the organic wheat producer price can be more than
under organic farming. It is also in third place in the annual per-capita double the price of the conventional one. For milk, there is even a
consumption of organic products. The share of the total utilisable negative price gap. In Poland, consumers spend on average less than
agricultural area (UAA) under organic farming reached 25.7% in EUR 10 per capita per year on organic food.
2020, equalling almost 680 000 ha. Most of the land under organic In 2019, EU support for organic farming amounted on average to EUR
farming is dedicated to permanent grassland (58%), followed by 134 per ha, supplemented by EUR 77 per ha of national co-financing.
cereals (20%). In most cases, grassland farms can convert to organic Support from the CAP covers around 80% of all area under organic
farming more easily than arable or permanent crops farms. farming 19.
More than half of the organic holdings in Austria are dedicated to Barriers to the development of the organic-food market include: a low
dairy or cattle-rearing and cattle-fattening. This is also due to the supply of raw materials; underdeveloped market channels; relatively
unique characteristics of Austria, where 64% of agricultural land is high prices; lower purchasing power (77% of the EU average) and
considered to be in areas facing natural constraints. lower awareness on the part of domestic consumers compared with
Organic milk production in Austria increased by 46% between 2014 other countries. There are good prospects for the development of the
and 2020 to reach a share of 17% of total Austrian milk production. organic food market in Poland over the coming decades, but it is still
According to FADN data, the yield gap between organic milk in its initial development phase.
production and conventional production is around 18% in specialised The Polish authorities see great potential for the development of
farms. This is compensated for by a producer price premium that organic farming and the growth of the market, and have set
reached 27% in 2020. Moreover, organic milk producers save on themselves the target of doubling the organic UAA compared with
average more than 20% on veterinary costs per cow compared with 2020, reaching 7% in 2030.
conventional producers. All of these elements together result in higher
profitability for organic milk producers (the income per worker is Czechia: 21% of agricultural land to be supported for
around 20% higher). Similarly, organic arable crops have a lower yield organic production under CAP strategic plan
but also lower costs (for plant protection products and fertilisers) and
a higher income per worker 17. By 2020, Czechia had reached a share of 15% of UAA under organic
The high share of organic farming is stimulated by high domestic farming. This is the second highest share (after Estonia) of the
demand. 11% of total retail food sales are organic, and these are countries that joined the EU in 2004 or after. The largest share of this
mostly channelled through general retailers, which account for 81% area was used for permanent grassland (82% of the total UAA under
of all sales of organic products in the country 18. This might indicate organic farming), followed by cereals (7%). This land use is reflected
that organic consumption is fully part of regular Austrian consumer in a relatively high share of organic cattle (20% in 2020) and sheep
habits (with an annual per capita consumption of EUR 254, one of the and goats (40% in 2019). However, only 1% of all milk produced by
highest in the world). Czechia is organic. According to FADN data, organic beef producers
The Austrian organic farming sector benefits from CAP support that is have higher income per worker (between 50% and 90% higher on
higher than for conventional farms. EU support for the maintenance average, depending on the size class of the farm) thanks to a
of organic farming under the rural development programme is producer price premium and greater subsidies. According to the latest
119 EUR/ha on average, supplemented by 115 EUR/ha of national co- Organic Food Market Report for 2020 20, the market share of organic
financing. The number of supported hectares has constantly food in Czechia is 1.77%, showing that there is still room for
increased. In its CAP strategic plan, Austria is willing to continue to consumption to increase. The total organic food turnover of Czech
support organic farming and has set a target of 30% of the total producers, including exports, reached approximately CZK 9.41 billion
agricultural area to be under organic farming to be achieved by 2030. (EUR 383 million) in 2020.
The total area under organic farming (conversion and maintenance)
Organic farming has difficulties taking off in Poland receiving CAP support grew from 311 000 ha (65% of the total UAA
under organic farming) in 2015 to 517 000 ha (96% of the total UAA
The total area under organic farming in Poland fell for a few years under organic farming) in 2020. In 2019, support per hectare under
after 2014. This trend seems to have come to an end, with a small the rural development programme amounted to EUR 104 on
increase since 2019. Nevertheless, the agricultural area under organic average 21. However, there were large discrepancies between different
farming in Poland (3.5% in 2020) is still well below the EU average.
types of organic production, as in many other Member States. Most
Cereals, plants harvested green and permanent grassland cover more
money within organic agriculture was provided for permanent
than two thirds of the Polish area under organic farming. Organic
grassland, where the CAP subsidy rate was EUR 84/ha for conversion
livestock production – mostly poultry and cattle – is very limited. 44%
of Polish organic holdings are general arable crop producers.
19
European Commission, ‘Dashboard Organic Production, Directorate-General for
Agriculture and Rural Development’, 2022.
17 Green Report 2021 – The situation of the Austrian Agriculture and Forestry (in
German), Federal Ministry of Agriuclture, Regions and Tourism, 2021, Vienna,
20
Report on the organic food market in Czechia in 2020 (in Czech), Czech
https://gruenerbericht.at/cm4/jdownload/send/2-gr-bericht- Ministry of Agriculture, 2022, https://eagri.cz/public/web/file/698660/
terreich/2393-gb2021. 514_TU_56_Zprava_o_trhu_s_biopotravinami_v_CR_v_roce_2020_V1.pdf.
18 Bioinfo Austria 2021 – Gastro- Data, Agrarmarkt Austria, 2021, Vienna,
21 European Commission, ‘Dashboard Organic Production, Directorate-General for
https://bioinfo.at/bio-in-zahlen. Agriculture and Rural Development’, 2022.

14
and EUR 83/ha for maintenance. For arable land, the rate can be as Romania: a potential yet to be developed
high as EUR 669/ha for conversion and EUR 583/ha for maintenance.
For permanent cultures, such as hops and vineyards, this rate reached Since 2017, Romania has registered rapid growth in the amount of
EUR 900/ha for conversion and EUR 845/ha for maintenance. By agricultural land under organic farming (under conversion and
2028, Czechia wants 21% of its UAA to be farmed organically. maintenance), reaching 469 000 hectares in 2020 (of which 41% are
under conversion) 24. However, the share in 2020 (3.5% of the
Romanian UAA) is still significantly below the EU average of 9.1%.
France: more than 2.5 million hectares of land under Most of the land under organic farming (61%) is used for cereals and
organic farming permanent grassland. The number of organic dairy cows reached a
peak in 2014, falling to roughly half the 2014 level in 2020. In recent
France is a developed market for organic food, from both a supply
years, there has been rapid growth in the number of organic poultry
and a demand perspective. In terms of the absolute land area under heads (especially for egg production) and in the number of organic
organic farming, France became the most significant EU country in beehives.
2020, overtaking Spain, with more than 2.5 million hectares. This From 2015 to 2019, the number of processors in the organic system
represents a share of 8.7% of total French UAA. Permanent increased from 106 to 191 and the range of organic products
grassland, plants harvested green, and cereals are the main organic
diversified greatly.
crops. Almost 5% of the cattle and milk produced in France is organic The demand for organic product by Romanian consumers is still very
(France produces one fifth of the EU’s organic milk).
low. Retail sales of organic food amounted to EUR 41 million in 2020.
In 2020, 11% of French farms were organic (fully or partially). In Nevertheless, consumer interest in organic products is growing,
terms of farm specialisation, vineyards, cereals-oilseed-protein crops, following the trend at European level.
general field crops, and dairy producers accounted for the highest The area under organic farming benefiting from CAP support has
share of organic holdings in France (respectively 19%, 12%, 10% and been growing consistently, reaching 82% of the total area under
10%). 22
certified organic farming. In the same year, organic support
Based on FADN data for specialised farms, French organic producers (conversion and maintenance) under the rural development
have lower yields than conventional French producers (-48% for
programme amounted to EUR 242 per hectare.
wheat, -17% for maize, -31% for milk – average 2015-2020). The low number of organic processors, together with the increasing
However, French organic farms benefit from a price premium of 21% consumer demand, can be an opportunity for market development for
for wheat and 28% for milk in 2020, but no premium for beef. French corresponding organic products, but would require additional
organic producers also have lower costs for pesticides, fertilisers and investments.
veterinary services, and benefit from higher CAP support. As a result,
The Romanian authorities see great potential for the development of
their average income is similar to that of conventional farms. organic farming, and agro-tourism and extensive farming. Romania,
France is the second largest EU market in terms of organic retail food like other EU Member States, is developing a national plan to support
sales, after Germany, with EUR 12.7 billion in sales and a share for organic farming. This plan includes subsidies for new operators, the
organic products of 6.5% of national retail food sales. Over the last distribution of organic food within the School Programme, and
decade, the fastest growth was registered in organic fruit, sales of measures to promote consumption and encourage production. At the
which grew by 13% annually. However, in the last 2 years, organic same time, the national strategic plan will finance commitments to
meat and eggs have been the categories with the largest increase in
maintain organic farming, and convert new areas to organic farming.
annual sales. Annual per capita expenditure on organic products in
France was EUR 188 in 2021. 55% of organic food is sold through
general retailers, while specialised organic retailers account for 29%
of all organic sales. This is one of the highest percentages of organic
sales accounted for by specialised organic food retailers in the EU 23.
The share of land under organic farming receiving specific CAP
support in 2020 was 56.6% in France. The budget allocated by France
to measures to support organic farming has continuously increased in
recent years. In 2020, average organic support per hectare in rural
development programmes was EUR 128/ha, supplemented by EUR
42/ha national co-funding [23].
For the programming period 2023-2027, the support for conversion
to organic farming will increase by 36% (reaching EUR 340 million
per year on average), with the aim of doubling the area under organic
farming and achieving the target of 18% of the UAA under organic
farming by 2027.

22
Source: Eurostat, Integrated Farm Statistics, 2020, preliminary data, specific
extraction https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-manuals-and-
guidelines/-/ks-gq-20-009.
23 Euromonitor International; Health and Wellness Industry Edition 2022. Data
available for BG, CZ, HU, PL, RO, SK, AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, DE, EL, IE, IT, NL, PT, ES,
and SE. Volumes refer to retail only.
24 Eurostat (online data table org_cropar).

15
 © Volodymyr - stock.adobe.com

2.2 Environmental impact: organic A significant increase in nematode abundance and thus positive
effects on biological soil quality were observed in organic farming
farming has a positive impact systems compared to conventional systems 28.
on the environment and Positive effects are also reported for climate-related parameters
(such as carbon sequestration) in organic farming systems compared
climate to conventional systems for soil organic matter content, soil organic
Organic production is a sustainable management system with specific stocks, and the soil organic carbon sequestration rate. These positive
objectives and principles on the basis of which detailed production effects are present even in organic farms with low rates of manure
rules are established 25. The combination of methods leads to application 29.. On greenhouse gases (GHGs), a decrease of GHG
different benefits and trade-offs. emissions (both for CH4 and N2O emissions) per unit of land can be
shown for organic farming on farms with both animal and plant
Compared to conventional farming, organic farming has positive production. The results also depend on the type of production.
environmental and climate impacts when results are reported per unit However, the situation is less clear for the impacts per unit of food
of agricultural land: positive effects have been found for biodiversity, product and for individual product categories. For instance, positive
carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, effects can be reported for organically produced fruits, but dairy
eutrophication, nutrients loss and soil biological quality. No significant products and eggs do not show significant differences in GHG
effects or contrasting results have been found for air pollutants, and emissions between organic and non-organic products 30.
pests and disease control. However, since crop yields are usually
lower in organic systems compared to conventional systems, when Organic systems, as compared to conventional systems, did not
results are reported per unit of product, no significant effects have significantly reduce ammonia emissions both per unit of area and per
been found for nutrient loss/eutrophication, acidification, greenhouse unit of product 31.
gas emissions and land use, while effects remained positive for Organic cropping systems may increase the soil nitrogen stock
energy use. compared to conventional systems, but this is not supported by a
Unless mentioned otherwise (i.e. per unit of food), results are
described per unit of agricultural land in the following paragraphs.
When comparing biodiversity between organic and conventional
farming systems, a variety of studies have found a higher total
abundance of arthropods, birds, non-bird vertebrates, plants and soil London, UK 2005 pp. 261-269, https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01005.x.
organisms on organically farmed land 26. A meta-analysis showed that
the species richness in organic farming is up to 34% higher than in
28 Puissant, J. et al, ‘Soil Biology and Biochemistry, Quantification of the global
impact of agricultural practices on soil nematodes: A meta-analysis’, Science
conventional farming 27. Other meta-analyses showed similar results. Direct, Vol. 161, 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S003807172100256X.
25 Parliament and Council Regulation (EP, EC) No 2018/848 of 30 May 2018 on
29 García‐Palacios, P. et al, ‘Crop traits drive soil carbon sequestration under
organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council organic farming’, Journal of Applied Ecology, Vol. 55, Issue 5, London, UK,
Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, article 5. 2018, pp. 2496-2505, https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/
10.1111/1365-2664.13113.
26 Crowder D. W. et al, ‘Conserving and promoting evenness: organic farming and
fire‐based wildland management as case studies’, Wiley Online Library, Vol.
30
Clark M. and Tilman D., ‘Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of
93, Issue 9, USA 2012 pp. 2001-2007, https://doi.org/10.1890/12-0110.1 agricultural production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice’,
IOP Publishing Ltd, Environmental Research Letters 12(6):064016, 2017,
27 Smith O. M. et al, ‘Landscape context affects the sustainability of organic https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6cd5.
farming systems’, PNAS, Vol. 117, No 6 Washington DC, USA, 2019, pp. 2870–
2878, https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.1906909117. See also
31 Tuomisto H. L. et al, ‘Does organic farming reduce environmental impacts? -a
Bengtsson, J. et al, ‘The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and meta-analysis of European research’, PubMed, Vol. 112, 2012, pp. 309-320,
abundance: a meta‐analysis’, British Ecological Society, Vol. 42, Issue 2, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22947228/.

16
statistical analysis 32. Considering nitrogen leaching per unit of area, In terms of energy use, the production of organic cereals, oil crops,
the figures for organic farming are lower than for conventional pulses, eggs and dairy products used less energy per unit of food
farming22, while no significant differences were observed for compared to conventional production. This was not the case for fruit
phosphorous leaching/run-off and ammonia emissions. and meat production (similar energy use) and vegetables (higher
energy use in organic systems) 34.
Pest abundance was found to significantly increase in organic
systems compared to conventional systems, even though the natural Figure 2.1 – Synthesis of the available scientific evidence (from
enemies of pests were also found to be significantly higher in organic published meta-analyses*) on the effects per hectare of organic
systems than in conventional systems. Organic farming does not farming systems (as compared to conventional) on environmental
therefore avoid the need for pest control 33. Sections 1.10.1 and 1.10.2 and climate impacts
of Annex II of Regulation 2018/848 in fact prescribe that the
prevention of damage caused by pests and weeds shall rely primarily
on the protection by natural enemies, the choice of species, crop
rotation, mechanical/physical methods, and thermal processes. Only
when plants cannot adequately be protected from pests by these
measures, or in the case of an established threat to a crop, can
certain products and substances authorised for use in organic
production be used, and only to the extent necessary.
Organic farming also limits the use of antimicrobials, especially in
livestock farming. Part II of Annex II of Regulation (EU) 2018/848 sets
out livestock production rules. Section 1.5 of this Regulation covers
the healthcare of animals and forbids the use of chemically
synthesised allopathic veterinary medicinal products (including
antibiotics and boluses of synthesised allopathic chemical molecules)
for preventive treatment of livestock. To treat sick animals, antibiotics
may be used where necessary, but under strict conditions and under
the responsibility of a veterinarian, when the use of phyto-
therapeutic, homeopathic and other products is inappropriate.

*Each meta-analysis synthesises the results of large numbers (10-230) of field

experiments comparing organic farming to conventional farming systems, using robust
statistical methods.
Source: European Commission, iMAP (Integrated Modelling platform for Agro-economic
and resource Policy analysis), https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/display/IMAP/

© scharfsinn86 - stock.adobe.com

32 ‘Kopittke, P, M. et al, ‘Global changes in soil stocks of carbon, nitrogen,

phosphorus, and sulphur as influenced by long‐term agricultural production’,
Wiley Online Library, Vol. 23, Issue 6, 2017, pp. 2509-2519,
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.13513
33 Andrivon, D. et al, ‘Can organic agriculture give up copper as a crop protection 34 Clark, M and Tilman, D., ‘Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of
product?’, INRA, Science & Impact, Paris, France, 2018, p. 5, agricultural production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice’,
https://www.inrae.fr/sites/default/files/pdf/expertise-cuivre-en-ab-8-pages- IOP Science, 2017, pp. 1-12, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-
anglais-1.pdf. 9326/aa6cd5/pdf

17
 © jackfrog - stock.adobe.com

2.3 Social sustainability: organic Graph 2.12 – Share of organic holdings by age and gender of farm managers in
the EU in 2020
farming attracts younger
farmers 65 years or over
From 55 to 64 years
In most countries, farms fully converted to organic farming or under From 45 to 54 years
conversion attracted younger farm managers compared to
conventional farms 35. At EU level, around 21% of organic farms in From 40 to 44 years
2020 had a manager aged under 40, while this proportion was only From 35 to 39 years
12% in conventional farms. From 25 to 34 years
In terms of gender balance, the share of organic farms run by women Less than 25 years
was lower than the share of conventional farms run by women at EU
20% 10% 0% 10%
level (26% versus 32%) in 2020. However, in eight countries, the
share of farms run by women was (slightly) higher in organic farming Men Women
than in conventional farming: Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Finland,
Source: DG AGRI calculation based on Eurostat, Integrated Farm Statistics, 2020,
Germany, Ireland, France, and Austria [35].
preliminary data, specific extraction.
Organic farms run by women focused on olives (13% of all organic
holdings run by women), general arable crops (13%), cattle-rearing
Higher animal welfare standards in organic farming
and fattening (11%), and fruit (9%). Compared to conventional farms,
the presence of female managers in organic farming was higher in According to the study on ‘CAP Measures and Instruments Promoting
cattle-rearing and fattening, dairying, and fruit farms. On the other Animal Welfare and Reduction of Antimicrobials Use’ 38, organic
hand, women were underrepresented in organic arable crops farms farming can also be considered as a relevant systemic approach for
[35]
. improved animal welfare and reduced antimicrobial use. This is
because practices implemented in organic animal husbandry
Despite the lower share of organic farms run by women at EU level,
(according to the EU’s organic regulations) differ significantly from
the income gap between farms run by women and men (i.e. farms run
conventional practices. These organic practices are characterised by
by women typically make less income than farms run by men) was
increased space allowance, permanent outdoor access, no preventive
smaller in organic farms than in conventional farms in most Member
antimicrobial use, stricter treatment management of antimicrobial
States in 2019 (-28% versus -43% at EU level). 36
use, and reduced mutilations (for safety reasons and under
Organic farming is more labour intensive than conventional farming. anaesthesia or analgesia). Specific practices are also set for each
To produce the same output value, more labour was needed (+4% at animal species. Organic cattle have longer weaning periods, more
EU level in 2020, but with big variations among countries and types roughage-based feeding and specific bedding requirements instead of
of farms, reaching up to three times more working units per output in full-slatted floors. Organic pigs get litter and roughage, and organic
Lithuania for arable crop production). 37 poultry benefit from more light, more perches and nests, access to
dust baths and access to fresh water whenever they want. The
production of poultry bred for meat requires the use of slow-growing
breeds.
35
Source: Eurostat, Integrated Farm Statistics, 2020, preliminary data,
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-manuals-and-guidelines/-/ks-gq-
20-009.
38 European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural
Development, ‘Study on CAP measures and instruments promoting animal
36 Source: EU FADN, 2019 data. welfare and reduction of antimicrobials use’, European Commission, Brussels
37 Source: EU FADN, 2020 preliminary data. May 2022, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2762/122586

18
 © Syda Productions - stock.adobe.com

Respondents to this survey were asked what they considered to be

3. Organic sales the most important characteristics of ‘sustainable’ food. ‘Nutritious
and healthy’ (41%) was the most common response, with 4 in 10 of
Organic food responds to consumer expectations for those surveyed mentioning this as one of the main characteristics of
more sustainable food sustainable food. Close to a third of respondents mentioned ‘little or
no use of synthetic pesticides’ (32%) and nearly 3 in 10 cited
The EU organic logo gives a coherent visual identity to organic ‘affordability of food for all’ (29%) as the most important
products sold in the EU. This makes it easier for consumers to identify characteristics of sustainable food. Less than a quarter of
organic products and helps farmers to market them across all EU respondents mentioned ‘local or short supply chains’ (24%) and ‘low
countries. The organic logo can only be used on products that have environmental and climate impact (e.g., carbon footprint)’ (22%) as
been certified as organic by an authorised control authority or body. being the main characteristics of sustainable food, while a fifth cited
This means that they have met strict conditions on how they are ‘high animal welfare standards’, and ‘minimal packaging, no or little
produced, transported and stored 39. plastic’. Slightly less than a fifth mentioned ‘respect for workers’
rights, health and safety and fair pay’ (19%), ‘organic’ and ‘minimally
processed, traditional’ (both 18%). ‘Fair revenue for producers’ was
mentioned as being one of the most important characteristics of
sustainable food by just 16% of respondents, while only a tenth cited
‘availability’ (10%).
Organic products are one of the answers to these preferences
expressed by consumers about sustainable food. Around a quarter of
According to a Eurobarometer survey in 2022 , more than six in ten
40
respondents thought that eating a healthy and sustainable diet
Europeans (61%, +5 percentage points since 2020) are aware of the
involved eating organic food (26%).
organic farming logo. This level of recognition is much higher than for
other logos such as the ‘Fairtrade’ logo (41%), the ‘protected Data for Denmark (see graph 3.1) 42, which is the EU country with the
geographical indication’ logo (22%), the ‘protected designation of highest share of organic retail sales, show that the main drivers for
origin’ logo (16%) and the ‘traditional specialty guaranteed’ logos buying organic are avoiding spray residues in fruit and vegetables,
(16%). better animal welfare and better environment and drinking water.
In addition to the EU organic logo, consumers can encounter several On average, 83% of EU respondents believe that organic food
other logos when buying food. These logos are produced by private products comply with specific rules on pesticides, fertilisers and
quality schemes identifying products that claim benefits in terms of antibiotics, with the highest scores in Denmark (95%), Italy and
environmental protection, animal welfare, health, or social conditions. Sweden (both 93%). At the other end of the scale, this opinion is
These aspects are indeed very important to consumers, as shown by a shared to a lower extent in Lithuania (63%), Romania (73%), Bulgaria
Eurobarometer survey in 2020 41. and Czechia (both 74%). In addition, 81% of EU respondents agree
that organic food products are produced with better environmental
practices and higher animal welfare standards than other food
products, ranging from 67% in Lithuania to 89% in Italy.
39 European Commission, ‘Organics at a glance’, 20.05.2022,
https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/farming/organic- A 2020 report by the European Food Safety Authority confirmed that
farming/organics-glance_en.
pesticide residues are generally lower in organic food than in
40
Special Eurobarometer 520 – ‘Europeans, Agriculture and the CAP’, 2022,
https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2665.
41 Special Eurobarometer 505 - ‘Making our food fit for the future – new trends 42 Source: Statista, ‘What are the main reasons why you buy organic food?’,
and challenges’, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/data/datasets/s2241_505_eng? 2020, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1194826/main-reasons-for-buying-
locale=en. organic-food-in-denmark/.

19
conventionally produced food. In 2020, 55% of all food samples - organic food at 8.5%. A large majority of the EUR 44.8 billion of sales
organic and non-organic – contained no quantifiable pesticide of organic food and drink in the European Union is concentrated in
residues, while for the organic food sample, more than 80% Germany and France, which account for 33.5% and 28.3% of the EU’s
contained no quantifiable residues 43. sales of organic food respectively.
Graph 3.1 – Main reasons for buying organic food in Denmark in 2020 (share of Compared to 2015, the EU organic retail sales were almost double in
respondents in %) 2020, whereas the area under organic farming increased by 41%. The
growth in organic sales was particularly fast during the COVID-19
0 10 20 30 40 50
pandemic, understood as the consequence of consumers paying more
Avoid spray residues in fruit / veg attention to health issues, higher food consumption at home and/or
Better animal welfare the shortage in conventional food.
Better for environment / drinking water
There are 6 EU countries in the global top 10 countries for the highest
More sustainable
per capita consumption of organic food globally by value: Denmark
Better quality
(EUR 384), Luxembourg (EUR 285), Austria (EUR 254), Sweden (EUR
Better taste
212), France (EUR 188) and Germany (EUR 180). Denmark and
Healthier
Austria also rank as world leaders in terms of organic food’s share of
I always buy organic
retail food sales (respectively 13% and 11%). The situation is very
Make Christmas dinner more special
different among the EU countries. For instance, in Bulgaria, Hungary,
Other
Portugal and Romania, the share retail food sales accounted for by of
Do not know
organic food sales is close to 0%. In these countries, organic is still at
Source: Statista, ‘What are the main reasons why you buy organic food?’, 2020, an early development stage and demand has not yet fully emerged 46.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1194826/main-reasons-for-buying-organic-food-in-
denmark/. Graph 3.2 – Organic retail sales, share and value (in billion EUR), 2020 in
selected countries
Compared with conventional food, organic food was perceived as less
affordable by most respondents to the 2022 Eurobarometer survey 44 16 16
in all EU countries. The countries with the highest percentages of 14 14
respondents of this view were Greece (98%), Sweden, Estonia and
Retail sales (billion EUR)

12 12
Cyprus (all 97%), and the lowest were Romania (78%), Austria (85%)

Organic Share (%)

10 10
and France (90%).
8 8
Since 2020, the proportion of respondents who agree that organic
6 6
food products are difficult to find in supermarkets, shops or markets
in the area where they live has decreased in 15 EU countries, most 4 4
strikingly in Portugal (50%, -13 percentage points), Greece (40%, 2 2
-12), Austria (39%, -12), and Czechia (31%, -10). However, it has 0 0
increased in ten countries, most notably in Malta (63%, +9) and DK AT LU SE FR DE EE IT NL BE IE
Cyprus (65%, +6%). Affordability appears to be a key factor in the Retail sales Organic retail share
development of demand for organic products, with differences from
Source: FiBL & IFOAM, ‘The World of Organic Agriculture, Statistics and Emerging Trends’,
one Member State to another. For instance, in Spain, higher prices are 2022.
the main reason why people say they do not purchase more organic
food products (55% of respondents said this, in 2021 45). Economic Organic products sales grew rapidly in the fresh food
developments affecting EU consumers’ purchasing power, should they market
persist, including a phase of high inflation and slow economic growth
expected in the coming years, may affect the growth of organic In the fresh food market, sales of organic products have increased in
consumption in the EU. all categories in recent years, in terms of both volume and market
share. A survey in France, Germany, Italy and Spain shows that eggs
Sales of organic food increased strongly in the EU are the product with the highest organic share and fastest growth in
until 2020 the fresh food organic market47. Total sales volumes of organic and
non-organic eggs grew by 9% in 2021 compared with 2012, but the
In 2020, the world market for organic food and drink exceeded EUR most notable increase was in volumes of organic eggs (65%) in these
120 billion. The EU ranks second in the world for consumption of four countries. The growth rate of organic eggs in France was 126%
organic food, with a share of 37%, of the global market, with the over this period, and the share of organic eggs reached 16.6% in
United States accounting for the largest share of the global market at 2021.
(41%). They are followed by China, the third largest market for
Organic fresh fruit and vegetables represent another success story of
organic farming. In the same four countries, organic fruit volumes
43 European Food Safety Authority, ‘The 2020 European Union report on
pesticide residues in food’, EFSA journal, Volume 20, Issue 3, 2022,
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7215. 46
FiBL & IFOAM – ‘Organics international The world of organic agriculture –
44
Special Eurobarometer 2022 520 – Europeans, Agriculture and the CAP, Statistics & emerging trends 2022’, Organic World Publishing, Frick,
https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2665 Switzerland, 2022, 68 pp, https://www.organic-world.net/yearbook/yearbook-
45 Statista, ‘Reasons why people do not purchase more organic food products in 2022/yearbook-2022-download-pdf.html
Spain in 2021’ 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1298016/reasons- 47 Source: Euromonitor International; Fresh Food Industry Edition 2022. Data
not-to-buy-more-organic-food-spain/. available for four EU countries: FR, DE, ES, and IT.

20
increased by 57% between 2012 and 2021 and reached a share of Denmark has the highest share of organic milk in overall drinking milk
9% of total sales of fresh fruit, while sales of vegetables grew by sales (40.3%), followed by Sweden (21%). The highest shares of
54% and also reached a share of 9% of sales of fresh vegetables. organic cheese sales in the EU are in Denmark (9% of all cheese
The growth rate in this sector was the highest in France (especially for sales) and Austria (7% of all cheese sales).
fruit). However, a decrease in the consumption of organic fruit and
Retail sales of organic olive oil and other oils in the EU were 34
vegetables is expected due to the current decrease in consumers’
million litres each in 2021 (up +83% and +34% respectively, since
purchasing power and high inflation.
2012).
While overall meat consumption has decreased in the four countries
Retail sales of organic rice in the EU were 39 000 tonnes in 2021 (up
surveyed (9%), organic meat consumption registered a spectacular
72% on 2012). Sales of organic pasta grew even faster over the
growth (+91%), albeit from a low base, indicating a shift by
period, growing by 150% and reaching 140 00O tonnes. Sales of
consumers. Similarly, the consumption of starchy roots (potatoes and
organic juice reached 166 million litres (+113%) in 2021 48.
others) decreased by 5% whereas the organic volumes increased
significantly (+32%). General retailers are the main channel for the
Graph 3.3 – Growth in organic retail sales in volumes, annual growth rate 2012- distribution of organic food
2021 (%)
Organic food in the EU is distributed primarily via general retailers,
20 with peaks in those countries where the share of organic consumption
is very high, such as Denmark and Austria. The second largest
15 distribution channel for organic food consists of specialised organic
retailers.
10 Graph 3.5 – Organic retail sales in value by distribution channel, share 2017 (%)
100
5
80
0
Eggs Fruits Vegetables Meat Starchy 60
Roots
France Germany Italy Spain
40

Source: Euromonitor International; Fresh Food Industry Edition 2022. 20

Demand is also increasing for organic packed food
0
Over the last decade, demand has also increased very rapidly for AT BE CZ DK FR DE EL IE IT LU NL
organic packed food in all EU countries and across all product General Retailers Organic Retailers
categories. Direct Marketing Other channels
Source: The World of Organic Agriculture, Statistics and Emerging Trends 2022, FiBL &
Despite the decrease in total EU retail sales of milk (-8% compared IFOAM.
with 2012), retail sales of organic milk increased by 62% since 2012
and reached 1.3 billion litres in 2021. Organic cheese sales grew even General grocery retailers are the main distribution
faster (+125%) whereas yoghurt sales increased by 73% and butter channel for organic packed food
and spreads by 50%. Approximately half of the organic dairy products
The distribution of organic products through the various retail
volumes (in each category) were sold in Germany and France.
distribution channels follows different patterns from country to
Graph 3.4 – Retail sales of packed organic products in volumes, 2012=100, in 19 country. In many EU countries, large general grocery retailers (such as
EU countries supermarkets, hypermarkets and discounters) dominate the organic
300 distribution market, with a share of 90% or more of all sales in
250 Denmark, Finland and Sweden. A large part of organic packed food is
distributed via discounters in Germany (41%) and Denmark (31%).
200
Conversely, in Hungary and Italy, half of the sales go through
150 traditional grocery retailers. E-commerce is growing and it has
100 reached a share of 10% or more in Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and
50 the Netherlands [48].
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Butter and spreads Cheese

Milk Olive Oil
Pasta Rice
Vegetable and Seed Oil Yoghurt
100% Juice Cream
Source: DG AGRI calculations based on Euromonitor International; Health and Wellness
Industry Edition 2022. Data available for BG, CZ, HU, PL, RO, SK, AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, DE, EL, 48 Euromonitor International; Health and Wellness Industry Edition 2022. Data
IE, IT, NL, PT, ES, and SE. available for BG, CZ, HU, PL, RO, SK, AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, DE, EL, IE, IT, NL, PT, ES,
and SE. Volumes refer to retail only.

21
 © MAGNIFIER - stock.adobe.com

Graph 4.1 – EU imports of organic products by class 51 (million tonnes)

4. Imports on the rise 49

Commodities
1.6 3.0
For some agri-food products, production in the EU is limited (e.g. 1.4 Other primary
tropical products) or demand outpaces supply (e.g. sugar). Imports 2.8
1.2 Processed
from outside the EU fill that gap. Data on import volumes of organic (incl. wine)
products are available from TRACES (TRAde Control and Expert 1.0 2.6
Food
System) 50. This is the European Commission’s online management 0.8 preparations
tool hosting the sanitary certificates requested for intra-EU trade and 0.6 2.4 Non-edible
importation of animals, food, feed and plants as well as the organic
inspection certificates. This database does not, however, provide data 0.4 Beverages
2.2
on values of imports. 0.2 Fish and other
0.0 2.0 non-agri
The EU imports organic products from over 120 countries. Imports of
2018 2019 2020 2021 TOTAL (right
organic products can take place on the basis of equivalency axis)
recognitions and equivalency agreements or through recognised Source: TRACES, data before 2021 do not include imports from the UK due to the
control bodies. The EU has currently 14 equivalency recognitions or unavailability of data at that time.
agreements with the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Canada, Imports of commodities have been decreasing, mainly due to the
Chile, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, Tunisia, Republic of Korea, New diminishing supply of oilcakes, sugar and wheat. However, imports of
Zealand, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States of ‘other primary’ products have risen, mainly thanks to growth in the
America. For other countries and for products not covered under such demand for tropical fruit, and in particular bananas. From 2018 to
equivalencies, a series of control authorities and control bodies are 2021, imports of tropical fruit increased by 27% to 900 000 tonnes,
recognised certifying operators who want to export their organic of which imports of bananas increased by 26% to 720 000 tonnes.
products to the EU on the basis of equivalence.
Imports of other high value products are significantly smaller.
The new legislative framework on organics based on Regulation (EU) Nevertheless, they showed higher growth rates between 2018 and
2018/848 applies from 1 January 2022. It introduced a system of 2021. For example, imports of processed products (mainly juices and
control authorities and control bodies recognised for certifying
olive oil) increased by 13% to 210 000 tonnes, food preparations by
imports from third countries on the basis of compliance with EU rules.
254% to 100 000 tonnes and beverages by 120% to 3.700 tonnes.
Imports of organic products on the rise Exporters of tropical fruit top the list of exporting
Imports of organic products into the EU increased from 2.71 million countries
tonnes in 2018 to 2.87 million tonnes in 2021 (+6%). In terms of
product classes, the principal imports are commodities and other The principal exporters of organic bananas – Ecuador and the
primary products, with a combined share of around 90% of total Dominican Republic – are the top exporters of organic products to the
organic imports in volume. The reported increase in imports in 2021 is EU. Moreover, exports from these countries to the EU have increased
notably due to the availability of data on imports from the UK.
51 "Commodities" includes: cereals, vegetable oils and oilseeds, sugars, milk
powders and butter, unroasted coffee and cocoa. "Other primary" includes:
49
For further details: EC (2022), ‘EU imports of organic agri-food products – Key meat products, fruit and vegetables, milk yoghurt and honey. "Processed"
developments in 2021’, September 2022, European Commission, DG includes: cheese, meat preparations, wine and fruit juices. "Food preparations"
Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels, https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/ includes: infant food, confectionary and pasta. "Beverages" includes: beers,
system/files/2022-09/agri-market-brief-19-organic-imports_en.pdf. spirits and soft drinks, while "non-edible" covers: plants and essential oils.
Moreover, in its scope, the organic regulation also covers fishery products,
50 European Commission, TRACES, https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/traces_en which are reported under "Fish and non-agri".

22
by 30% and 51% respectively from 2018 to 2021. India (+74%, Graph 4.2 – EU imports of organic products by exporting country (million t)
mainly oilcakes) and Colombia (+102%, beet and cane sugar; tropical 1.2
fruit, nuts and spices) also increased exports substantially. However,
1.0
exports decreased from China (-55%, oilcakes), Ukraine (-28%,
wheat) and Turkey (-28%, cereals; oilseeds). 0.8

Lastly, the UK became a significant exporter of certain organic 0.6

products to the EU in 2021. Exported products include dairy products 0.4
(100% of EU organic imports), pet food (98%), beer (100%), poultry 0.2
meat (100%), sheep and goat meat (81%) and pig meat (62%).
0.0

2018 2019 2020 2021

Source: TRACES, data before 2021 do not include imports from the UK due to the
unavailability of data at that time.

© piyaset– stock.adobe.com

23
 © Natalia Lisovskaya – stock.adobe.com

by all Member States except the Netherlands, which supported

5. Matching the Green organics farming through national funds 54.

Deal ambition with The CAP, a supporter of organic

appropriate EU support to In 2020, 61.6% of EU land under organic farming received specific
organic support payments [54] (on average EUR 144/ha of CAP support
and EUR 79/ha of national co-financing). Organic farmers in Areas
organic farming with Natural Constraints (ANC) can also receive organic farming
support. Further Rural Development measures also supported the
Main funding comes from the CAP development of organic production, including investments in organic
farming practices and aid for the marketing and promotion of organic
The EU recognises the benefits of organic farming for sustainable products. Therefore, organic farmers had the possibility to benefit
agriculture, food and consumers. Under the 2014-2022 CAP period, from different measures and receive higher subsidies under Rural
organic farmers were able to benefit from several support measures. Development than conventional farmers.
For 2023-2027, as part of the CAP Strategic Plans, various
interventions stay in place to support organic farming in the EU. Under Pillar I of the CAP (direct payments), organic producers
Today, the main CAP funding comes from the European Agricultural automatically qualified for greening payments. Producer
Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). Significant dedicated funding organisations of organic fruit and vegetables also benefited from
programmed under both the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund increased EU co-financing rates through operational programmes.
(EAGF) and/or the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development Overall, organic farmers usually benefited from higher total EU
(EAFRD) will be dedicated to support conversion to and maintenance subsidies, as illustrated in the graphs below for arable crops (+37%),
of organic area in the upcoming funding period (2023-2027) 52. dairy (+68%), and beef farms (+26%) (using 2015-2020 average
data).
In the 2014-2022 funding period, under measure 11 of EAFRD
(payments for organic farming), 27 out of 28 Member States offered
payments for conversion to (measure 11.1) and/or maintenance of
(measure 11.2) organic farming 53. Sub-measure 11.1 was
implemented in all Member States except Austria and the
Netherlands. For the 2014-2022 period, Member States had planned
to support a total of 4.1 million ha (2.5% of utilised agricultural area)
for conversion to organic farming. By 2020, effective support had
reached 3.5 million ha (2.2% of UAA). Measure 11.2 was implemented

© HQUALITY - stock.adobe.com
52 European Commission, ‘Dashboard Organic Production, Directorate-General for
Agriculture and Rural Development’, 2022,
https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/DashboardIndicators/OrganicProductio
n.html
53 IFOAM, ‘Organic farming and the prospects for stimulating public goods’,
Brussels, Belgium, p. 15-21, 2016, https://www.organicseurope.bio/content/
uploads/2020/06/ifoameu_study_organic_farming_cap_2014_2020_final.pdf? 54 Source: DG AGRI calculations based on data on programme implementation
dd. and Eurostat (online data table TAG00025).

24
Graph 5.1 – Subsidies to arable crop farms by type in selected countries, average the Green Deal objectives, including the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity
2015-2020 (thousand EUR/AWU) strategies’ targets. One of those targets is to have 25% of EU
agricultural land under organic farming by 2030 and significantly
40
increase organic aquaculture. In 2021, the Commission launched the
30 “Action Plan for the development of organic production” to support the
achievement of this target. Member States are now implementing the
20 EU action plan via concrete policy measures in their national organic
action plans and their CAP strategic plans 55..
10

0
National organic farming targets
Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic

Conv.

Organic
Member States were encouraged to indicate national target values for
DE FR IT AT PL EU organic farming (as of a total UAA in 2030) in their CAP strategic
Direct paym. Agri-environmental paym. plans and to develop national organic action plans (NOAP) (see Table
LFA/ANC paym. Other RD paym. 5.1). Austria, Belgium-Wallonia, Germany and Sweden have set the
Source: EU FADN, 2020 data are preliminary. most ambitious targets, with 30% of UAA under organic farming to be
reached by 2030. Member States' targets are, however, not directly
Graph 5.2 – Subsidies to dairy farms by type in selected countries, average comparable, as targets have been set for either 2027 or 2030 (or not
2015-2020 (thousand EUR/AWU) indicated yet).
50
In their CAP Strategic plans, Member States have set a target value
40 for the result indicator measuring the share of their total UAA
expected to receive support for organic farming by the end of the
30 2023-2027 period. According to the CAP strategic plans, all Member
States have set their expected target for area under organic farming
20 with CAP support. All Member States plan to increase the area
receiving CAP support. At EU level, it is expected that about 10% of
10 the total UAA will be receiving CAP support for organic farming in
2027. However there are significant differences: 18 CAP strategic
0 plans aim at supporting more than 10% of their UAA for organic
farming with CAP funding, with 3 out of those, targeting above 20%
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic

(Austria, Czechia and Estonia).

DK DE FR LV NL AT PL SE EU
Direct paym. Agri-environmental paym.
LFA/ANC paym. Other RD paym.
Source: EU FADN, 2020 data are preliminary.

Graph 5.3 – Subsidies to beef farms in selected countries, average 2015-2020

(thousand EUR/AWU)
50
40
30
20
10
© goodluz - stock.adobe.com
0
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic
Conv.
Organic

CZ DE FR IT AT SE EU
Direct paym. Agri-environmental paym.
LFA/ANC paym. Other RD paym.
Source: EU FADN. 2020 data are preliminary.

Organic farming contributes to four out of nine of the 2023-2027

CAP objectives. These include protecting the environment, contributing
to the preservation of landscapes and biodiversity, generating a viable
farm income, and responding to societal demands on food health,
sustainable food and animal welfare.
55 European Commission, ‘Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the
In the 2023-2027 CAP, organic farming has a more prominent role Committee of the Regions on an Action Plan for the Development of Organic
and following the Farm to Fork strategy, it will play an even more Production’, COM (2021) 141 final, European Commission, Brussels, 2020.
important role than before. The CAP is a key instrument in achieving

25
Graph 5.4 – Share of total UAA receiving CAP support for organic farming
30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Target: Share of total UAA receiving CAP support for organic farming (2027) Baseline: Share of total UAA receiving CAP support for organic farming (2018)

Source: DG AGRI, based on approved CAP strategic plans.

© Jacob Lund - stock.adobe.com

26
Table 5.1 – CAP targets 56
Expected
National target Share of UAA
Share of UAA share of UAA
values 58 of receiving
under organic receiving
Country share of UAA to organic CAP
farming, 2020 organic CAP
be under support, 2018
(baseline) 57 support
organic farming (baseline)
(2027) 59
BE-Flanders 60 1,5% N/A 0,9% 5,0%
BE-Wallonia60 12,5% 30,0% 9,5% 18,0%
BG 2,3% 7,0%* 1,5% 4,0%
CZ 15,3% N/A 14,4% 21,3%
DK 11,5% 20,0% 8,5% 15,4%
DE 9,6% 30,0% 7,5% 12,1%
EE 22,4% N/A 18,9% 23,3%
IE 1,7% 7,5%* 0,1% 7,5%
EL 10,2% N/A 4,7% 16,4%
ES 10,0% 20,0% 4,3% 5,1%
FR 8,7% 18,0%* 3,7% 11,7%
HR 7,2% 12,1% 6,4% 12,1%
IT 16,0% 25,0%* 8,5% 11,9%
CY 4,4% 10,0% 3,5% 9,0%
LV 14,8% 20,0%* 13,5% 18,8%
LT 8,0% 15,0% 6,2% 12,8%
LU 4,6% N/A 3,8% 19,8%
HU 6,0% 10,0%* 2,2% 5,3%
MT 0,6% 5,0% 0,0% 2,5%
NL 4,0% N/A 0,0% 6,0%
AT 25,3% 30,0% 19,4% 23,7%
PL 3,5% 7,0% 2,4% 4,5%
PT 8,1% N/A 5,5% 19,2%
RO 3,5% N/A 1,4% 3,5%
SI 10,8% 18,0% 9,6% 17,0%
SK 11,7% 20,0% 8,2% 14,1%
FI 13,9% 25,0% 12,1% 19,4%
SE 20,3% 30,0% 11,8% 14,5%

56 Figures are partly taken from the CAP Strategic Plans

57
Source: Eurostat (online data table org_cropar).
58 Based on "national value" (CAP strategic plans) or, when missing: national organic action plan (NOAP). Values for 2030, (*) 2027.
59 Result indicator R.29 (share of UAA receiving support for organic farming in the CAP strategic plans). Target values included in the CAP strategic plan.
60 For BE-Flanders and BE-Wallonia: 2020 Baseline for UAA under organic farming is provided in the CAP plans (not available in Eurostat). The share of UAA receiving support
for 2018 is based on the rural development programme implementation report.

27
What interventions are available in the requirements (encompassing “cross compliance” and “greening” of the
2014-2022 CAP) as well continuing with agri-environment-climate
CAP strategic plans? Comparison of the interventions under rural development. Each Member State must
establish a list of eco-schemes adapted to its own environmental
CAP in 2014-2022 and 2023-2027 objectives. Farmers’ participation in one or more eco-schemes in the
framework of the CAP is voluntary. Compared to the Greening 65
Maintenance and conversion can be funded in both
measures of the 2014-2022 CAP, eco-schemes offer more flexibility.
pillars: eco-schemes and organic interventions This is because the content and budget for each measure of the eco-
Eco-schemes (ES) are payments under the first pillar of the CAP that schemes can be chosen freely, as long as they contribute to at least
contribute to protecting the environment, climate, and animal two of the environmental, climate and/or animal welfare objectives
welfare. They are a key element of the legislative framework on the set out in the CAP Strategic Plan regulation. Farmers can select and
future of the CAP. As a minimum, 25% of direct payments in 2023- implement the appropriate measure for their farm.
2027 will be linked to those eco-schemes helping deliver better The design of support for organic interventions varies among Member
environmental and climate performance compared to 2014-2022. States. Some Member States promote conversion to organic through
eco-schemes in the first pillar, and existing organic farms receive
Table 5.2 – Interventions applied by Member States to support organic farming
their payments through the second pillar (rural development
in the period 2023-2027 61 interventions), as in the current programming period. Other countries
Conversion Maintenance may support conversion through EAFRD payments in the second pillar
Country and provide support to existing organic farms through eco-schemes.
ES 62 RD 63 ES RD In some Member States, organic interventions are offered exclusively
BE-FL x x through pillar 1 or pillar 2 for both conversion and maintenance.
BE-WA x x
Other CAP support
BG x x x x
CZ x x The CAP does not only finance conversion to and maintenance of
DK x x organic farming. Other measures have either a direct or indirect
DE x x impact on organic farming: organic farmers can also benefit from
EE x x x x
support from other measures such as knowledge transfer and
IE x x
innovation actions, sectorial interventions, advisory services, quality
schemes for agricultural products and foodstuff (including promotion
EL x x
and information measures), investments, farm business development,
ES x x
setting up of producer groups and organisations, agri-environment-
FR x x 64 x64
climate measures (AECM), Natura 2000 and Water Directive
HR x x
payments, payments to areas facing natural or other specific
IT x x
constraints, animal welfare, cooperation (including EIP-AGRI) and
CY x x
LEADER 66.
LV x x
LT x x x In the interventions of the fruit and vegetables sector, organic
LU x x production is included. In the wine sector, there is funding for
HU x x information campaigns concerning quality schemes such as organic
MT x x
production.
NL x x
AT x x
PL x x
PT x x x x
RO x x
SI x x
SK x x
FI x x
SE x x
Total 7 24 10 23

Eco-schemes are an integral part of the "green architecture” of the

CAP strategic plans. They also consist of an increased level of basic
65 Farmers were entitled to greening payments if they complied with the
mandatory practices beneficial to the environment. Organic farmers
61
The figures are partly taken from the CAP strategic plans. automatically received greening payments for their farm in the 2014-2022
CAP period because organic farming is considered to provide an environmental
62
Eco-schemes. benefit by definition.
63 RD: Rural development interventions 66
IFOAM, ‘Organic Action Plans. Development, Implementation and Evaluation -
64 Conversion is supported under rural development in both Metropolitan France A Resource Manual for the Organic Food and Farming Sector’, Brussels,
and French overseas regions. Maintenance is supported under eco-schemes in Belgium, p. 21-27, https://www.fibl.org/fileadmin/documents/shop/
Metropolitan France, and under rural development in French overseas regions. 1507-organic-action-plans_1.pdf

28
 © dusanpetkovic1- stock.adobe.com

National organic support remains a priority of Non-CAP support

Member States The European Investment and Structural Funds (ESI funds) offer
Additional national organic subsidies, outside the CAP, encourage support to EU producers, SMEs and organic stakeholders through
supply and demand for organic products. Most EU countries have operational programmes. ESI funds are part of the EU’s Common
shown their determination and willingness to develop the organic Strategic Framework (CSF) and aim to support economic development
sector using national funds. Strategic national or regional plans in all Member States, as part of the Europe 2020 strategy.
support land use under organic farming and consumption of organic
products. Some Member States, for example, have introduced a fixed
proportion of organic food in public catering.

Promoting the exchange of knowledge among farmers, farm advisers

6. Research and and scientists is a key objective of EU-funded research focusing on
organic farming. The OK-Net Arable project significantly contributed
innovation in the organic to this objective. It made material and information accessible to
farmers through the Organic Farm Knowledge (OFK) platform. It aims
sector to increase productivity and quality in organic arable cropping all over
Europe. In livestock production, EU-supported research has
Organic farming is a knowledge-intensive, rather than input-intensive, investigated alternative sources of high-protein animal feed and
form of agriculture. Research and Innovation (R&I) is crucial to boost helped organic farmers move towards 100% organic feed through the
organic farming, by supporting knowledge generation and innovations OK-Net EcoFeed project.
to help organic farmers comply with EU organic rules.
The EU also promotes and supports the coordination of European
Under the EU’s Research and Innovation framework programme transnational research in organic food and farming systems through
Horizon 2020 (2014-2020), the EU has funded several research CORE Organic, a network of European ministries and research councils
projects that focus on organic farming. These account for more than funding national research in organic food systems. Research funded
EUR 50 million of EU funding and involve more than 150 partners under CORE Organic addresses central parts of organic agriculture,
from more than 20 EU Member States, as well as associated including soil fertility and weed management. On animal husbandry,
countries and international partners. These projects address specific projects address important aspects such as animal health and
challenges facing organic farming and are helping to meet the EU’s welfare, resilience, robustness and feeding. In addition to the organic
targets for type of production. EU-funded research is addressing key farming-specific projects mentioned above, several other research
areas like organic crop breeding, through projects such as LIVESEED, projects funded under Horizon 2020 concerned the organic sector,
ECOBREED, and BRESOV, which increase the availability and quality of notably in areas like crop diversification, plant health and sustainable
organic seeds. Replacing and phasing out contentious inputs in husbandry systems.
organic farming, such as copper, is the objective of RELACS and
The European Commission is further increasing support to R&I in
Organic PLUS. These projects foster the development and facilitate
organic farming under Horizon Europe (2021-2027). This is fully in
the adoption of cost-efficient and environmentally safe tools and
line with the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity strategies’ objective to
technologies. Furthermore, the project BIOFRUITNET is working to
boost organic farming, as well as with the new Action Plan on the
make European organic fruit production more competitive.
Development of Organic Production. Under this action plan, the
European Commission intends to increase R&I and dedicate at least

29
30% of the budget for R&I actions in agriculture, forestry and rural Most EU-funded research projects relevant to organic farming
areas to topics specific or relevant to the organic sector. This implement the multi-actor approach. This means that organic farmers
commitment can already be seen in the first Cluster 6 of the Horizon are genuinely involved in the research projects, using their knowledge
Europe Work Programme (2021-2022), under which at least 35% of and/or entrepreneurial skills to develop solutions and create ’co-
the budget allocated to research in the above areas is devoted to ownership’ of the results. This speeds up the acceptance and take-up
topics that are relevant to the organic sector. This includes organic of new ideas, approaches and solutions developed in the project. As
crop breeding, fraud prevention, and foresight for reaching the Farm part of the requirements, multi-actor projects must involve
to Fork target on organics. EU-funded research on agroecological operational Groups of the European Innovation Partnership for
practices in a wider sense also benefits the organic sector, including Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI) funded under
areas such as plant health, climate change mitigation and adaptation, the CAP as much as possible. Research projects focusing on organic
and agroforestry. EU-funded research will continue to look at the farming therefore contribute to strengthening the links between the
potential of digital tools to support the specific needs of organic Horizon Europe programme and the CAP.
farming, such as block-chain technologies to improve the traceability
The CAP supports Operational Groups of EIP-AGRI. These Groups are
of organic products. Besides calls for projects, the Commission is
intended to bring together multiple actors – such as farmers,
tapping into the potential of other instruments under Horizon Europe
researchers, advisers, businesses, environmental groups, consumer
to boost the organic sector. One key instrument to mention in this
interest groups and other NGOs – to advance innovation in the
regard is the EU Mission ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’, under which the
agricultural and forestry sectors. In the EIP-AGRI Operational Groups
specific contribution of the organic sector to aspects such as soil
database 67, as of November 2022, 72 out of 2 433 Operational
biodiversity and soil carbon will be analysed.
Groups have been registered as dealing with organic farming. The
The next ‘Cluster 6’ of the Horizon Europe Work Programme (2023- types of projects for Operational Groups are very broad. Nevertheless,
2024) will provide further opportunities and will continue to help the project must contribute to the EIP-AGRI objective of promoting
tackle barriers to boost the organic sector and reach the Farm to Fork agricultural innovation that is more resource-efficient, productive, low
target on organics. This will include a future R&I partnership on in emissions, climate-friendly, and resilient, while operating in
agroecology currently under development and provisionally entitled harmony with the essential natural resources on which farming
‘Accelerating farming systems transition: agroecology living labs and depends.
research infrastructures’. The partnership will set up and support a
European-wide network of living laboratories (living labs) as spaces
for co-creating solutions to local needs. It will put the farmer at the
centre of R&I activities, thus accelerating progress on the ground.

© Dusko - stock.adobe.com

67 European Commission, ‘EIP-AGRI – Operational Groups’, 2022,

https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/eip-agri-projects/projects/operational-
groups

30
 Contact: DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Analysis and Outlook Unit
Email: [email protected]

© European Union, 2023

Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Please cite this publication as: EC (2023), Organic farming in the EU – A decade of organic growth, January 2023. European Commission, DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels.
For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the European Union, permission must be sought directly from the respective copyright holders.
While all efforts are made to provide sound market and income projections, uncertainties remain.
The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission.
 Twitter: @EUAgri
#AgriOutlook
https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu