eurovoc_concepts:
action programme
activity report
cancer
disease prevention
public awareness campaign

text: #**4p«Wtti COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES VOLUME I Brussels, 10. 02. 1997 COM(97) 19 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN CANCER WEEK 1995 CONTENTS 0. 1. SUMMARY PRESENTATION OF EUROPEAN CANCER WEEK 1995 1. 1 1. 2 1. 3 1. 4 1. 5 1. 6 Legal basis Previous Weeks Importance of information campaigns European Code against Cancer General organisational principles 1. 5. 1 Partnership with non-governmental organisations 1. 5. 2 European character, Community added value and subsidiarity 1. 5. 3 Professionalism Specific features of the 1995 Week 1. 6. 1 Campaign aims 1. 6. 2 Campaign tone 1. 6. 3 Target groups 1. 6. 4 Types of material 1. 6. 5 Activity levels II. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS II. 1 Campaign aimed at general public II. 1. 1 Posters and leaflets II. 1. 2 Media relations II. 1. 3 Advertising II. 1. 4 Conclusions. II. 2 Campaign targeted on general practitioners 11. 2. 1 Brochure design, publication and dissemination 11. 2. 2 Advertising III. QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS III. 1 Campaign aimed at general public III. 1. 1 Evaluation methodology III. 1. 2 Results at European level III. 1. 3 Results per country III. 1. 4 Conclusions III. 2 Campaign aimed at general practitioners 111. 2. 1 Evaluation methodology 111. 2. 2 Reaction to and views on the brochure 111. 2. 3 Knowledge of and views on the Code 4 5 5 5 6 7 7 7 8 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 12 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 19 20 21 21 21 22 111. 2. 4 Reaction to and views on other materials used in the campaign 111. 2. 5 Conclusions IV. FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES V. BUDGET 22 23 23 25 0. SUMMARY Every year the "Europe against Cancer" Programme holds a European Cancer Week in the second week of October with the support of Member States' anti cancer Leagues and Associations. In 1995 this information campaign focused on promoting the revised version of the European Code against Cancer consisting of 10 simple recommendations for cancer prevention. The aim of the Europe-wide campaign was to get the vital message across to the general public that everyone can reduce their own personal risk of contracting cancer, to encourage people to adopt a more balanced lifestyle and to draw attention to the benefits of early detection. To achieve these aims the general public was approached not only directly but also indirectly - through targeting general practitioners as intermediaries with a major role to play in this respect. The abovementioned Leagues and Associations printed 6. 7 million copies of common European materials (posters and leaflets) made available by the Commission in connection with the Week. Furthermore, a media campaign coordinated under the Programme generated 172 million contacts with European citizens (112 million via press articles and at least 60 million via television or radio programmes), to which can be added some 172 million contacts achieved via free advertising in the European press (37 million contacts) and on television (135 million contacts). The media pressure thus created, underpinned by a whole host of events organised by the Leagues during the Week, had a major impact on European Union citizens' knowledge of cancer prevention. Thus, by the end of the campaign over 20 million more Europeans were convinced that cancer is preventable, while the various risk factors (lack of fruit, vegetables and cereals in diet, fatty foods, excessive consumption of alcohol, lack of physical exercise, smoking) were better known after the campaign. European Cancer Week 1995 also helped reinforce the profile of Community action in the public health field: 24% of Europeans said they had heard of European Cancer Week, while 12% (spontaneously) and 24% (with prompting) said they knew of the European Code against Cancer. During the Week almost all the Union's general practitioners (321 000) received a brochure on the European Code against Cancer published under the Programme. A telephone survey of GPs showed that this publication was viewed very favourably (87. 6% of doctors who recalled receiving the brochure said it was well done, while 77. 5% found it very useful or moderately useful). Therefore, GPs can now be expected to incorporate the cancer prevention recommendations into their medical practice on a wider basis. I. 1 2 3 PRESENTATION OF EUROPEAN CANCER WEEK 1995 This report provides facts and figures for evaluating (quantitatively and qualitatively) the European dimension of European Cancer Week 1995 in line with the duty of transparency incumbent upon the Commission in the exercise of its powers. 1. 1 Legal basis As a key element in the activities undertaken as part of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme in the public information and health education field, organisation of a European Cancer Week is one of the measures set out in the Annex to the Council Decision adopting a 1990 to 1994 action plan1 ("second action plan") as well as in the Annex to the decision of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting an action plan to combat cancer for 1996 to 20002 ("third action plan "). Due to considerable delays in the adoption procedure, the decision of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting the third action plan did not materialise until 29 March 1996, which meant that the Programme had no action plan in 1995. The legal basis for organising European Cancer Week (as well as for the other activities undertaken under the Programme in 1995) was therefore contained in the remarks on budget line B3-43043, namely that the appropriation for the Programme is intended to cover "expenditure on public information campaigns and on increasing awareness". It is worth noting here that organisation of European Cancer Weeks was at no time called into question during the procedure to adopt the third action plan. 1. 2 Previous Weeks 4 European Cancer Week is held every year in the second week of October. Since the second action plan started the Week has centred on the following topics: 1990 : Tobacco and alcohol 1991 : Early detection and systematic screening 1992 : Cancer prevention at work 1993 : Passive smoking 1994 : Beneficial effects of fresh vegetables and fruit. Decision of the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on 17 May 1990 adopting a 1990 to 1994 action plan in the context of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme (OJ L 137, 30. 5. 1990, p. 31). Decision No 646/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 March 1996 adopting an action plan to combat cancer within the framework for action in the field of public health (1996 to 2000) (OJ L 95, 16. 4. 1996, p. 9). General Budget of the European Union, OJ L 369, 31. 12. 1994/ 5 Further information on these campaigns can be found in the report from the Commission on the evaluation of the action undertaken under the Programme between 1987 and 19924, in the report from the Commission on the execution of the Programme in 19935 as well as in the report from the Commission on the implementation of the second action plan6. 1. 3 Importance of information campaigns It is generally accepted that some 70% of deaths linked to cancer stem from personal choices governing lifestyle and environment. Consequently, regardless of medical advances there will be no major reduction in the incidence of cancers and mortality linked to this disease unless the public can be persuaded to modify certain habits and attitudes. Therefore, people need information to allow them to choose a lifestyle providing maximum protection against the risk of contracting certain cancers, although such risks can never be totally banished. For this reason, providing the public with information plays an important role both in the second and in the third action plans under the "Europe against Cancer" Programme. In addition to annual organisation of European Cancer Week, the third action plan also focuses on: - - - - getting the cancer prevention message across more effectively; supporting networks involved in exchanging information and experience on cancer prevention; promoting information and awareness campaigns targeted on specific groups; promoting Europe-wide cancer prevention projects, especially concerning smoking. those A Eurobarometer survey undertaken in the 15 Member States in spring 1995 - see section III. 1 of this report for more details - shows how vital it is to run information campaigns on cancer prevention, since it reveals that 33% of Europeans believe cancer cannot be prevented (with the rate exceeding 50% in some countries). Therefore, Europeans are not sufficiently aware that every individual can do something to reduce their personal risk of contracting cancer, an information deficit which the European Cancer Weeks attempt to put right. Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on the evaluation of the effectiveness of Community action undertaken in the context of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme (1987-1992), COM(93) 93 final, 15. 3. 1993. Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the execution of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme in 1993, COM(94) 550 final, 5. 12. 1994. Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of the second Action Plan (1990-1994), COM(95) 356final, 18. 7. 1995. 6 1. 4 European Code against Cancer Each European Cancer Week concentrates on a specific topic related to cancer prevention. The 1995 Week set out to promote the revised version of the European Code against Cancer, the first version of which was drawn up in 1987 by the High-level Committee of Cancer Experts7 set up under the aegis of the Commission in January 1986 and which has since become the Programme's main scientific adviser. This Code - consisting of 10 simple recommendations putting across the essential messages on cancer prevention - has become a cornerstone of the Programme, with all the other information activities being based on it. Since its launch in 1987 the Code has mainly been disseminated by non-governmental organisations active in combatting cancer in Member States. In order to keep up with scientific progress, the Commission asked the European Institute of Oncology (Milan) to draw up a revised version plus an annex giving the scientific reasons for each of the 10 recommendations. The Institute coordinated the work done by a group of European experts in drafting the new text for the revised version of the Code, which the High-level Committee of Cancer Experts approved in December 1994 (Annex VI. 4). The objective of the 1995 Week was to draw attention to all 10 basic rules for cancer prevention (see 1. 6. 1). 1. 5 General organisational principles /. 5. 1 Partnership with non-governmental organisations The anti-cancer Leagues and Associations constitute the Programme's main partners when it comes to implementing the information campaigns. These bodies - whose role is acknowledged both in the second and third action plans - not only have considerable resources allowing them to bolster the European campaign at national, regional and local level, but also considerable experience in getting prevention messages across to the public. The Programme's main partners during the 1995 Week are listed in Annex VI. 5. Committee members in 1995: Prof Veronesi Prof. Bleehen Prof Boon Prof, van der Schueren Prof. Diehl Prof Overgaard Prof. Estape Dr Gonzalez Enriquez Prof Kleihues Prof Pujol Prof. Garas Dr Buttimer Prof. Dicato Prof. Kroes Prof Conde Prof. Einhorn Prof. Holm 10 11 12 13 14 Thus, the Commission makes a point of cooperating closely with the Leagues and Associations from the very outset, i. e. when drawing up the plans for the Week. To this end, the group of European representatives of these bodies (which met three times in 1995 under the Programme to prepare or evaluate the Week) set up a working group which the Commission departments running the Programme kept very closely involved in all decisions on the campaign's overall strategy and target groups, as well as on the text, slogans and visual materials to be used for the campaign. Furthermore the working group - which keeps the plenary group up to date on the progress made at the preparatory stage - was consulted by the Programme organisers on selection of the contractor commissioned to devise and coordinate the campaign (see 1. 5. 3). Involving the Leagues upstream of the Week proper ensures that the messages they put across are European ones and that they mobilise their resources to this end during the Week. As for the part of the 1995 campaign involving general practitioners (see II. 2), the Programme also cooperated with the European Group of Representatives of General Practitioners. /. 5. 2 European character, Community added value and subsidiarity From the very outset of the planning stage the Commission and the Leagues and Associations stressed the need to run a European campaign based on a common concept and materials of instantly recognisable Community origin. For the Programme this means showing European citizens that the Community plays an active role in the public health field, cancer prevention in particular, a role which also involves developing synergy between all the activities of national or regional bodies. For the Leagues and Associations it means harnessing the campaign design work done at European level and showing that they are active and acknowledged % partners - not only at national level but also at European level - in promoting a major Community cause, i. e. the war on cancer. The working group is the vehicle through which the European anti-cancer Leagues' expertise in getting messages on prevention across to the general public is channelled to devise and implement the information drives run as part of European Cancer Weeks. This pooling of effort generates considerable economies of scale (as compared to national campaigns run separately alongside one another) not only in regard to human resources but also financial ones. For example, the visual elements of the posters and leaflets are the same and therefore need to be designed and photoengraved only once; it is just the texts which vary from one country to another. In addition to the abovementioned economies, organising a Europe-wide campaign also boosts the impact of the publicity drive, given the fact that certain events receive more attention, from both the media and the public, when presented as international events. The UN's No-Smoking Day and Women's Day would probably receive less publicity if they were purely national events, and the same 8 15 16 17 18 applies to European Cancer Week. It seems that the public and the media like the idea of people in several countries uniting their efforts to promote a major social cause for a special day or week. Although the European Weeks are homogeneously presented in all member countries (same visuals and basic message), they do allow some margin for national modifications to reflect differences in the health policy field. Thus, for example, in 1995 Point 10 of the European Code against Cancer8 was expanded on in some countries to fit in with national policy on screening for breast cancer. In specific terms, the Commission and the Leagues divided up the work for the 1995 Week as follows: the Programme provided its partners with the films for printing the leaflets and posters, while the printing and dissemination of these materials was paid for by the Leagues (with a financial contribution from the Programme though - see V. ). Furthermore, the Commission also handled, via its contractor, much of the media relations before and during the Week (see II. 1. 2) and endeavoured to obtain free advertising (see*II. 1. 3 and II. 2. 2). For their part, the Leagues organised a whole host of activities during the Week making use of the common materials produced (colloquies, exhibitions, events in schools, shows, etc. ). /. 5. 3 Professionalism In order to make sure the campaign was highly visible Europe-wide, the Programme decided to bring in a professional public relations and media communications agency. An open invitation to tender was published in June 1995 to sound out the market9. There were 21 replies, and (following the go-ahead from the working group of Leagues and Associations) the firm of EURO-RSCG was awarded the contract not only on the basis of the quality and price of its tender but also because it was well established in almost all Member States - a must, especially for handling relations with the national media. It should be noted that the contract with EURO-RSCG covers not only design and coordination of European Cancer Week but also promotion of the Programme in general. However, in 1995 the company's energies were almost exclusively devoted to the Week. The contract was concluded for one year, renewable four times for a further year. Following the company's successful work for the 1995 campaign and in line with a recommendation from the Leagues and Associations' plenary group, the contract was renewed for 1996. "Check your breasts regularly. Participate in organised mammographie screening programmes if you are over 50. " - See also 1. 4. OJC 134, 1. 6. 1995. 9 1. 6 Specific features of the 1995 Week /. 6. J Campaign aims 19 The campaign's main aim was to promote the European Cancer Code (see 1. 4), through highlighting the 10 prevention recommendations to ensure that Europe's citizens were: - - - informed of the fact that everyone can reduce their personal risk of contracting cancer; encouraged to adopt a healthier lifestyle based on the recommendations; made aware of the benefits accruing from early detection of cancer. This objective was pursued by addressing the general public - - directly via a Europe-wide publicity campaign; indirectly, by raising the awareness of general practitioners as key intermediaries (also see 1. 6. 3). 20 The campaign also set out to let the Union's citizens know that the Community is a player in the public health field (Community character of the Week). /. 6. 2 Campaign tone 21 22 23 All cancer prevention players agree that any information campaign aimed at modifying certain aspects of citizens' behaviour adversely affecting their health needs to adopt a positive tone, to encourage and motivate, and avoid pointing the finger of blame. Working from general guidelines the Programme contractor came up with a campaign stressing that everyone can opt for a healthy lifestyle, consult their doctor about certain persistent symptoms or disorders and - for women - participate in screening programmes, all with the aim of reducing the risk of contracting cancer. That every individual can opt for this responsible approach is reflected in the campaign slogan - "Preventing cancer - what I can do". The visual materials used in the campaign also reflect this same positive approach, presenting as they do 10 smiling and reassuring faces (10 people from 10 different countries, one for each of the Code's 10 points), each announcing the choice they have made to reduce their risk of contracting cancer and encouraging others to follow their example (also see Annex VI. 3). The accompanying texts were couched in very straightforward language because several Eurobarometer surveys had shown that people with no more than a rudimentary education know the least about cancer prevention possibilities. However, although it was deemed essential to keep things simple, major importance was attached to the scientific content of the materials, all of which were based on the scientific annex to the European Code against Cancer. An expert from the European Institute of Oncology in Milan was given the task of 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 coordinating the work to revise the European Code against Cancer and thus ensured that the texts drawn up were scientifically sound and consistent. /. 6. 3 Target groups The main target of the 1995 Week was the general public, because the European Code against Cancer's 10 recommendations concern all Europeans. General practitioners formed the campaign's second target group, with them being urged to pass on the Code's prevention messages to their patients. GPs' central role in educating their patients is self-evident because they are on the frontline when it comes to delivering health care to the populace as a whole. /. 6. 4 Types of material The pictures of people promoting the Code's 10 recommendations were incorporated into various types of material aimed at the general public, i. e. a series of 11 posters, a series of 11 leaflets, a video and a press release. The series of 11 posters (A2-format), produced in 11 language versions, contained a general poster covering the Code overall plus one for each of the Code's 10 points. Similarly, the series of 11 leaflets (folded A4-format) consisted of a general one plus 10 individual ones pressing home the Code's individual points. The six pages of these leaflets consisted of the following: - - - - Page 1: 10 faces (general leaflets) Face of person "representing" the particular point of the Code (other leaflets) Pages 2 to 4: Prevention messages Page 5: Presentation of the 10 points of the European Code against Cancer Self-evaluation test allowing individuals to determine how much they know about cancer prevention. Page 6: featured on the posters and A video (35 mm, black and white) presenting the Code's 10 key recommendations was produced in 11 language versions. During the 30-second clip each of the 10 actors the Code's 10 recommendations in their mother tongue. While the introduction and ending were in the vernacular, the rest of the soundtrack remained multilingual - but with subtitles added (11 language versions) - thus lending the video the desired multicultural flavour. The video was then made available to the major European television networks (see II. 1. 3). leaflets presented 30 The front page of the general leaflet (showing the 10 faces) was also used for an announcement intended for the general press (see II. 1. 3). 11 31 The following materials were produced for media relation purposes: - - "master" press information pack (European level); "national" press info packs; video news release linked to the campaign; these cassettes, 20 minutes long, were sent to the main European television stations. 32 The materials used for the GP campaign are dealt with under II. 2. 1. 6. 5 A ctivity levels 33 34 35 The 1995 European Cancer Week involved two clear-cut levels of activity, as explained below. Drawing on advice from the group of anti-cancer Leagues and Associations, the "Europe against Cancer " Programme devised and implemented - through its contractor - a European campaign whose various elements, based on common materials and a common approach to media relations, were used in all the European Union's 15 countries. Chapters II and III of this report contain quantitative and qualitative analysis data on the campaign. The campaign was supplemented by activities at national, regional or local level undertaken by the anti-cancer Leagues and Associations which organised, in most countries, a wide range of different events (scientific colloquies, health forums, exhibitions, educational shows, concerts, events in schools, street theatres, use of "infomobiles", etc. ) during European Week. Although not directly supported by the Programme, these activities underscored the European origin of the campaign of which they formed part. Since such activities were the exclusive responsibility of the anti-cancer Leagues and Associations, they have not been included in this evaluation report. While difficult to quantify, they considerably amplified the impact of the European campaign however. EL QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS 36 This chapter contains the main analysis data at European level. Annex VI. 2 of this report contains the individual results sheets giving the qualitative and quantitative data. per country. II. 1 Campaign aimed at general public II. 1. 1 Posters and leafle is 37 in each country printed From films made available to them under the Programme, the Leagues and Associations the common European materials in accordance with their financial resources and publicity policies. All in all, 6 700 000 posters and leaflets were printed in this manner throughout the European Union countries, of which there were: 12 5 436 000 "general" leaflets (covering the Code's 10 points) 964 000 "specific" leaflets (on a particular point of the Code) 124 500 "general" posters 170 200 "specific" posters. These materials were disseminated via the networks operated by the Leagues and Associations in each Member State. Exact distribution figures are not available for all countries, but on the basis of the available figures it is estimated that an average of some 80% of the documents printed by the Leagues and Associations were distributed on the occasion of European Week. //. 1. 2 Media relations The Commission's contractor was given the job of approaching the media in the 15 countries in connection with European Cancer Week and coordinating media relations, all in cooperation with the anti-cancer Leagues and Associations. A European press conference, attended by Commissioner Flynn, plus a series of 14 press conferences in Member States10 were held to launch the Week. More than 200 journalists attended them. Following the press conferences and as a result of press relations in general, the European Week, and more particularly the Code, were mentioned by some 700 articles in the Member States' print media. Both the national and the regional press in most countries covered the event. Specific mention of the European Commission and, more particularly, the "Europe against Cancer" Programme as the originators of the campaign varies from country to country; on average, some 50% of the articles name the European Commission as the originator of the campaign. The number of contacts obtained via the general press amounted to some 112 million11. As for radio and television coverage, the European Week was covered by some 170 news broadcasts or other mentions in the Union countries, both on private and public national radios and televisions as well as regional stations. In the 10 countries for which audience figures are available12, radio and television coverage created some 60 000 000 contacts; the total number of contacts generated via the media therefore amounts to at least 172 000 000. In Germany the anti-cancer organisations went in for other types of press relations. As is customary, this figure was calculated by multiplying by 2. 5 the number of copies sold of the dailies and periodicals concerned so as to arrive at the number of effective contacts (= circulation); some 45 million copies of the newspapers etc. involved were therefore sold in the 15 Member countries. Figures not communicated for the 61 programmes/mentions in Spain (38), Luxembourg (3), Italy (4), Portugal (10) and Netherlands (6). 13 38 39 40 41 42 10 H 12 43 44 45 46 47 13 14 ILL3 Advertising Since the budget involved was relatively modest for a publicity campaign aimed at getting through to the citizens of 15 countries, the decision was taken not to buy advertising. However, the Commission's contractor was asked to obtain free advertising on television (showing of video) and in the press (publication of press release in magazines and daily papers). Given the deadlines set for achieving this, the contractor's efforts were focused on television. It should be noted here that the legal provisions adopted by certain countries (in particular Spain, United Kingdom, Finland and - since November 1995 - Greece) limit the provision of free advertising, while other countries will grant free advertising only if advertising is also purchased. The figures given in the following paragraphs relate only to advertising obtained during the campaign', in some cases free advertising continued to be granted afterwards, thus amplifying the Week's impact. Despite the difficulties mentioned above, the Commission managed - via its contractor - to obtain a large chunk of free television advertising: thus, the video was shown more than 300 times in seven countries (Germany, Denmark, France, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal) and on the Eurosport channel. The number of contacts generated by this was approximately 135 000 000 OTS13. It should be noted that in monetary terms the free television advertising thus obtained amounted to around ECU 800 000. In addition to the above, the press release promoting the European Code against Cancer was published for free on 42 occasions in the general press in five countries, thus generating some 37 000 000 contacts14, amounting in cash terms to over ECU 200 000. 77. 7. 4 Conclusions To sum up the quantitative analysis, the campaign to promote the European Code against Cancer among the general public created at least 344 000 000 contacts (see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 1): 172 000 000 via media relations (112 000 000 for the press and at least 60 000 000 for radio and television) and 172 000 000 via free advertising (135 000 000 for television, 37 000 000 for the general press). To this should be added the number of contacts - difficult to quantify - created through distribution of the 6. 7 million leaflets and posters. OTS = "Occasion to See", i. e. the number of people likely to have seen the video. As is customary, this figure was calculated by multiplying by 2. 5 the number of copies sold of the dailies and periodicals concerned so as to arrive at the number of effective contacts (= circulation); some 15 million copies of the newspapers etc. involved were therefore sold in the five countries in question. 14 48 49 50 51 n. 2 Campaign targeted on general practitioners II. 2. 1 Brochure design, publication and dissemination Once general practitioners had been chosen as the campaign's second target group (see 1. 6. 2), the "Europe against Cancer" Programme consulted the European Group of Representatives of GPs' Associations, with which it maintains regular contact, to jointly determine the best way of getting through to this group and making it aware of the prevention recommendations contained in the European Code against Cancer. It was agreed to mail a brochure, consisting of three main sections as set out below, to every GP in the European Union: a. b. c. the text of the 10 points of the European Code against Cancer; a section common to all countries setting out the science behind each of the Code's recommendations and based on the scientific annex; a section aimed at persuading GPs to incorporate the recommendations of the European Code against Cancer into their medical practice. Italy and United Kingdom). The The common part of the brochure was written by a team of representatives of general practitioner associations from five European countries (Germany, France, Ireland, (incorporating recommendations into medical practice) is specific to each country, because national settings vary considerably due not only to different social security systems and health policies but also different cultures and customs. The authors of these "national" sections were also representatives of general practitioner associations. section last In order to ensure scientific consistency between the Annex to the European Code against Cancer and the common section of the brochure, the European Institute of Oncology (Milan) was asked to undertake the necessary scientific coordination. The "Europe against Cancer" Programme's contribution to publication of the brochure involved: - - - - - - - approaching prospective authors;. organising working meetings; paying authors' fees, travel and secretariat expenses; coordinating translation of the common part into all Community languages, in cooperation with the European Commission's Translation Service; formatting, proof-reading and printing the brochure, in cooperation with the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (EUROFFICE); compiling a list (in electronic form) of addresses of all GPs in the European Union15; addressing and mailing the brochure, in cooperation with EUROFFICE. 15 official For most countries associations; in countries where this was not possible - in particular for data protection reasons - these addresses were obtained through a broker. these addresses were supplied by the general practitioners' 15 52 53 54 It should be noted that all the necessary data protection measures were taken when handling the GPs' addresses. The 16 versions16 of the brochure (containing a foreword from Commissioner Flynn) were distributed to the GPs at the beginning of European Cancer Week. The total number of copies mailed was around 321 000, covering almost all general practitioners in the European Union. The percentage of those "returned to sender" was under 1% on average, which testifies to the high reliability of the address files used. The editions for Denmark and the Netherlands did not keep to the general structure of the brochure as described in paragraphs 48 and 49 above. In Denmark's case, the professional associations contacted opted for a brochure bereft of a national part and containing the Annex to the European Code instead of the common text mentioned above. In the Netherlands, the brochure distributed to GPs contained only the Code's 10 points and the common part, since the general practitioners' associations there did not wish to write a national part. As the qualitative analysis shows, this different approach had an effect on the reception accorded the brochure by the medical profession in these two countries (see III. 2). II. 2. 2 Advertising The Commission contractor was asked to obtain free advertising in professional health journals in the 15 countries in the form of publication of an announcement informing GPs that the "Europe against Cancer" Programme would be sending them a brochure. The negotiations were difficult in view of the short deadlines and the media priorities laid down for television as part of the general public campaign. Nevertheless, free advertising was obtained on 11 occasions in eight medical journals in four countries. This corresponded to a monetary value of ECU 100 000 and generated over 800 000 OTS among the medical professions. m. QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 55 56 Qualitative analysis of European Cancer Week 1995 is based on two main tools: "Eurobarometer" surveys covering the campaign aimed at the general public and a telephone survey for the campaign targeted on general practitioners. This chapter gives the main findings of the qualitative analysis. See Annex VI. 2 of this report for the individual results sheets containing the qualitative and quantitative data, per country (general public campaign and GP campaign). 16 Two versions for Belgium. 16 EQ. 1 Campaign aimed at general public III. 1. 1 Evaluation methodology 57 58 The 1995 European Cancer Week's impact on the general public has been evaluated on the basis of Eurobarometer surveys 43. 0 (March/April 1995) and 44. 0 (October/November 1995). During these two surveys - which involved a representative sample of some 16 000 Europeans17 and were carried out by INRA (EUROPE), a European network of market research and public opinion agencies - a number of identical questions were asked before and after European Week; comparing the replies received during the two surveys allows us to draw certain conclusions about the campaign's impact on the Union's citizens. As far as the Commission departments running the "Europe against Cancer" Programme know, no major "rival" campaign informing the general public of ways of preventing cancer was held in the period between the two surveys. The campaign's main objective was to promote the European Code against Cancer, which contains the essential recommendations enabling everyone to reduce their own individual risk of contracting cancer. Thus, most of the questions concerned ways of preventing cancer and the factors likely to increase cancer risks. Other questions concerned people's awareness of European Cancer Week and the European Code against Cancer. 59 In order to obtain a more detailed analysis per country, the Eurobarometer survey results were used to calculate the following two performance indices: - - performance index pertaining to the change in Europeans' attitudes, calculated by comparing the change in the percentage of the population in a particular country believing that cancer can be prevented with the change in the European average18; performance index pertaining to awareness of the European Code against Cancer, calculated by comparing the change in the percentage of the population in a particular country aware of the European Code against Cancer with the change in the European average19. 17 18 2 000 for Germany, 1 100 for Great Britain, 300 for Northern Ireland, 500 for Luxembourg and 1 000 for the other countries. This index i, is calculated as follows: ij = 100 x nt' - nt Et' - Et x Et nt where: E = Europe n = country considered t = spring 95 value t' = autumn 95 value 19 This index i2 is calculated as follows: 17 Furthermore, the rate of media pressure was established for each country; this is calculated by dividing the total number of contacts generated nationally via the campaign (advertising + media relations) by the number of that particular country's inhabitants. The two performance indices plus the rate of media pressure are given in the quantitative and qualitative analysis results sheets per country in Annex VI. 2. III. 1. 2 Results at European level Prior to the campaign (March/April 1995 survey) 33. 3% of the Union's citizens20 did not think it was possible to prevent cancer; after the campaign (Eurobarometer October/November 1995 survey) this figure had dropped by 7. 2 percentage points to 26. 1% (see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 2). Applied to the entire population of the European Union aged 15 and over (286. 6 million) - the age range of the population sample surveyed - this reduction means that after the campaign over 20 million more Europeans believed it possible to prevent cancer. One of the campaign's main aims had therefore been achieved, i. e. to make European citizens aware of the fact that combatting cancer also hinges on doing more for one's health. This same trend towards greater awareness of cancer preventability emerges when comparing attitudes before and after the campaign towards certain individual risk factors forming a sub-group of the risk factors highlighted in the Code (see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 3). Thus, the percentage of Europeans believing that excessive weight can increase the risk of cancer rose from 40% before the campaign to 48% after; the corresponding rate for excessive consumption of alcohol rose from 60 to 67%, for too much fatty food from 56% to 60%, for lack of exercise from 36% to 41%, for a diet low in fruit and vegetables from 50 to 53% and for a diet low in cereals from 45 to 48%. Awareness of the risks associated with smoking - very high before the campaign started (94% of Europeans believed that smoking increased the risk of cancer) - rose even higher, because after the campaign the corresponding figure was 96%. Both surveys contained two questions on screening for breast cancer, and these were therefore directly linked to Point 10 of the European Code against Cancer ("Check your breasts regularly. Participate in organised mammographie screening programmes if you are over 50"). The first asked whether women had ever heard about national screening programmes in connection with breast cancer. Prior to the campaign 77% of European women said they had heard of such programmes, 60 61 62 /, = 100 x nt'-nt Et' - Et x Et' nt' where: E = Europe n = country considered t = spring 95 value t' = autumn 95 value Weighted European averages. 20 whereas after the campaign the corresponding figure was 81%. The second question asked women whether they would take part in such a screening programme. The percentage of women stating that they would participate on their own initiative in such programmes rose from 65% before the campaign to 66% afterwards, while the percentage of women replying that they would participate only if they received a written invitation or reminder from their doctor remained the same at 27%, and the percentage of women saying they would not take part in a screening programme fell from 7% before the campaign to 6% afterwards. The campaign for 1997 European Cancer Week (whose main theme will be prevention of female cancers) will focus on this subject and endeavour to further heighten women's awareness in this key prevention field. Both surveys asked two identical questions aimed at measuring people's awareness of the European Code against Cancer (which has existed since 1987 and the revised version of which formed the campaign's focal point). The first measures spontaneous knowledge of the Code, whereas the second jogs respondents' memory somewhat by giving an example of the Code, thus evaluating knowledge when prompted (i. e. assisted recall). An increase in such awareness, by as much as eight percentage points, is observed in all countries apart from Sweden (see III. 1. 3); the European average for spontaneous knowledge went up from 9% before the campaign to 12% afterwards. Knowledge when prompted was approximately double that of spontaneous recall, and the European average increased from 21% before the campaign to 24% after. Two questions were asked only during the autumn survey in order to evaluate people's awareness of European Cancer Week and to find out from which sources they had heard about it. It turned out that some one quarter of Europeans (24%) say they had heard something about European Cancer Week (spontaneous knowledge) - a remarkable result highlighting the fact that the campaign's European origin is relatively well established. The replies to the second question show that television - whether in the form of current affairs programmes/reports (44%) or advertising (41%) - was clearly the main medium through which Europeans came to hear about European Cancer Week. Newspapers and periodicals/magazines came a poor second in this respect. III. 1. 3 Results per country 63 64 65 Analysis of the two performance indices calculated from the Eurobarometer results (see III. 1. 1) gave rise to four distinct groups of countries in terms of the campaign's overall impact: - - - - countries where the campaign was a huge success; countries where it was a success; countries below the European average; non-classifiable countries. 19 66 67 68 69 70 71 The campaign was a huge success in Germany, Austria, Spain, Greece and Ireland both as regards awareness of cancer preventability and knowledge of the campaign's European origin. In these countries the two performance indices are well above the average and the campaign's two aims in this regard were achieved to a very large degree, i. e. heightening European citizens' awareness and putting across European messages so as to make the Community's action in this field wider known. Furthermore, these countries benefitted in general from a strong and high-profile campaign (high rate of media pressure). The second group of countries consists of Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Italy and the United Kingdom; here one of the two performance indices is much higher than the European average, while the other is at an acceptable level. And in most of these countries the rate of media pressure is also above the European average, reflecting the link which exists between the extent of the publicity drive and the campaign's effectiveness. The countries where the campaign's impact was below the European average are France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; in these countries the two performance indices were at a satisfactory level overall, although below the average. The media pressure in these countries was lower, due mainly to the difficulties encountered in obtaining free advertising. Two countries - Portugal and Sweden - are difficult to classify under the evaluation system used. In Portugal, despite a very high rate of media pressure and the printing and distribution of a very large amount of campaign materials, the campaign performance indices are negative. It should be recalled here that the Eurobarometer results before the campaign were particularly positive in Portugal. The results for Sweden may stem from the fact that i) no materials were printed or distributed for the campaign and ii) media pressure during it was very low. III. 1. 4 Conclusions The campaign undertaken during 1995 European Cancer Week had a significant influence on the Union's citizens' knowledge about cancer prevention: after the Week 20 more million Europeans believed they could reduce their individual risk of contracting cancer. The campaign's prime objective (see 1. 6. 1) was therefore achieved for the most part, even if the impact within the 15 countries varies considerably and the knock-on effect of this improved knowledge on Europeans' behaviour with regard to the risk factors is not yet known. The campaign also contributed to giving a higher profile to the Community's activities in the public health field, in particular in the fight against cancer: after the Week, 24% of Europeans knew of the European Code against Cancer (see Fig. 4) while 24%o also said they had heard of European Cancer Week. 20 72 73 74 m. 2 Campaign aimed at general practitioners This campaign's aims were to familiarise GPs with the prevention messages contained in the European Code against Cancer and to make them aware of the importance of including advice on cancer prevention in their medical practice. The approach adopted to achieve this involved production of a brochure (specifically adapted to this profession's information requirements) and its dispatch to every general practitioner in the European Union during European Cancer Week (also seen. 2. 1). III. 2. 1 Evaluation methodology The GP campaign was evaluated by means of a telephone survey undertaken in the Union's 15 countries. During this survey 2 050 general practitioners were contacted21, which is a representative sample of 0. 7% of the Union's GPs. The GPs approached were chosen by the opinion poll agency from lists which differed from the address files used to mail the brochure (protection of data entrusted to the Commission). The telephone surveys were conducted in November 1995 on the basis of a semi-structured questionnaire containing 18 questions. These did not just ask the GPs' opinion about the brochure and the European Code against Cancer's 10 recommendations but also covered the other European materials and messages with which general practitioners came into contact during the whole campaign (press releases in professional journals, leaflets and posters distributed by the anti-cancer Leagues and Associations, messages put across via the mass media). III. 2. 2 Reaction to and views on the brochure GPs are literally deluged every day by advertising in their post; the risk of the European Code against Cancer brochure "drowning" in this flood was therefore relatively large. Seen in this light, the doctors' recall of the brochure is at an acceptable level as regards spontaneous recall (European average22 - 15. 3%), and is very good (39. 4%) in the case of recall when prompted (also called assisted recall - see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 5). However, the differences from country to country are very large, with the lowest spontaneous recall rate being 2. 9% in Sweden and the highest 40% in Luxembourg, and the lowest assisted recall rate being 22. 1% in Greece and the highest 86% in Luxembourg. 21 22 200 in Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Italy and the United Kingdom; 100 in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden and the Netherlands; 50 in Luxembourg. Weighted European averages. 21 75 76 Of the GPs recalling having received the brochure, 87. 6% felt it had been well done and 77. 5% considered it to be very useful or moderately useful (very useful: 31. 5%, moderately useful: 46. 5% - see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 6). It should be noted that the worst results for these two questions were recorded in Denmark (46. 4% for both questions), where the GPs' associations had not adopted the approach favoured by the "Europe against Cancer" Programme (also see II. 2. 1). The second country where a different approach had been adopted (Netherlands) also had results for the two questions very much below the average (60. 4% for brochure design, 57. 1% for brochure usefulness). Of the doctors who recalled having received the brochure, 20% said they had learned something from it (lowest rate 3. 8% in Italy, highest 38. 3% in Spain) while 10. 5% of them stated that the recommendations contained in the brochure had actually changed certain aspects of their medical practice (lowest rate 0% in Ireland and Sweden, highest 18% in Spain). 77 It should also be noted that 68. 2% of doctors recalling having received the brochure considered it useful to repeat the exercise in the future. Ill 2. 3 Knowledge of and views on the Code 78 79 80 The survey on general practitioners' recall of and views on the brochure sent to them was also used to determine GPs' knowledge of the European Code against Cancer and their views concerning its usefulness for the general public. Thus, 37% of all the doctors interviewed (regardless of whether they remembered receiving the brochure or not) said they knew the European Code against Cancer (see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 7). Of these, 82. 7% said the Code was very useful or useful for providing the general public with information (see Annex VI. 1, Fig. 8), a reply which vindicates the pride of place accorded to the Code by the "Europe against Cancer" Programme in its information drives. III. 2. 4 Reaction to and views on other materials used in the campaign It was deemed useful to use the same survey to find out the extent to which general practitioners had received, for placing in their waiting rooms, the leaflets and posters printed by the anti-cancer Leagues and Associations from the films supplied by the "Europe against Cancer" Programme. It should be noted here that waiting rooms were not the only place for distributing such materials - they were also made available to the general public in pharmacies, via direct mailing or handed out during various events put on during the Week. 15. 9% of all the doctors interviewed said they had received leaflets on the Code for their patients; the corresponding figure for the posters was 14%. Among the doctors having received these materials, a very large majority found them to be very interesting or moderately interesting (81. 8% for the leaflets, 71. 3% for the posters). 22 III. 2. 5 Conclusions 81 82 83 GPs had clearly picked out the brochure specifically intended for them from among the flood of advertising mail they receive. The doctors recalling having received the brochure judged it extremely positively, as they did the usefulness of the European Code against Cancer as a tool for informing the general public. This positive evaluation emerging from the telephone survey is confirmed by the very large number of requests for additional copies of the brochure received by the "Europe against Cancer" Programme from individual doctors (GPs or others), doctors' associations, medical faculties, other medical profession training bodies and various public health and health education institutions. More than 21 000 copies of the brochure will be reprinted in 1996 in order to meet this demand. Numerous statements from individual doctors and official declarations from many GP associations are highly appreciative of the fact that the European Commission approached doctors directly; in terms of the telephone survey, this is reflected in the high percentage of doctors in favour of a similar venture being undertaken in the future. IV. FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES 84 85 86 At its meeting on 13 December 1995 the Advisory Committee set up for the second action plan was presented by the Commission with an initial analysis of 1995 European Week's impact. The Committee members agreed that the Week had gone very well. The Commission also informed the European group of anti-cancer Leagues and Associations (14. 11. 1995), the Committee of Cancer Experts (23. 11. 1995) and the European Group of Representatives of GPs' Associations (23. 4. 1996) of the results of the 1995 European Cancer Week. These three groups also concluded that the 1995 Week had generated remarkable results. Furthermore, the group of Leagues and Associations - the Programme's main partner in organising the Week - recommended to the Commission that the contract (for planning and coordinating the Week) concluded with the EURO-RSCG media communications agency be renewed for 1996. A number of conclusions were drawn from the way the 1995 Week went for preparing and implementing the 1996 Week. Thus, in order to ensure greater synergy between the activities undertaken by all the players involved in the campaign at Member State level (anti-cancer League(s), Health Ministry, other bodies involved, Commission representative's office, media communications agency's local office), preparation meetings were organised in most countries among all the abovementioned players as well as representatives of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme and the media communications agency's head office. 23 87 88 89 It was decided to decentralise translation for future campaigns in order to improve the linguistic quality of the translated versions of the materials used and to adapt them to the particular circumstances in each country; henceforth the various language versions will be produced in cooperation between the contact person named by the League(s) in a given country and the media communications agency's office in that country. In order to improve the information flow between the Leagues, and in particular to those not represented in the working group advising the "Europe against Cancer" Programme on the Week, the group's minutes are to be systematically distributed to all members of the European group of Leagues; furthermore, each member of the working group will assume responsibility for informing the League(s) of a country not represented within the group. An independent evaluation of the second action plan (1990-1994) to be arranged by the Commission will also deal with 1995 - a year which was not covered by an action plan (also see 1. 1) - and will therefore include an evaluation of the 1995 European Week. That evaluation will be in addition to the one already undertaken by the Commission on the basis of the Eurobarometer surveys and the telephone survey of GPs used for the qualitative analysis contained in this report. 24 V. 90 BUDGET The budget allocated for implementation of 1995 European Cancer Week was as follows: - - - - - contract with the EURO-RSCG agency23 24 ECU 1 170 000 funding for anti-cancer Leagues and Associations for printing and distribution of materials: 14 x ECU 10 000 ECU 140 000 fees paid to authors for the "national" part of the GP brochure (8 x ECU 5 000): ECU 40 000 cost of project 95/C/45309 (production of the common part of the GP brochure) ECU 66 341 printing of GP brochure (322 000 copies, 16 versions) ECU 154 762 purchase of GPs' addresses for five countries ECU 10 000 TOTAL ECU 1581 103 23 24 The contract totalling ECU 1. 3 million also covers promotion of the "Europe against Cancer" Programme in general, but in 1995 the agency's activities concentrated almost exclusively (some 90%) on the Week. The contract did not foresee the buying of advertising space. However, free advertising space amounting in cash terms to over 1 MECU has been obtained by the agency (see also II. 1. 3 and 11. 2. 2) 25 ANNEX cf Volume 2 <2C ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 19 final DOCUMENTS EN 04 05 16 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-015-EN-C ISBN 92-78-15102-5 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg il


title: Απόφαση της Μεικτής Επιτροπής του ΕΟΧ αριθ. 2/97 της 10ης Φεβρουαρίου 1997 που τροποποιεί το παράρτημα VI (κοινωνική ασφάλιση) της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ

eurovoc_concepts:
European Economic Area
agreement (EU)
claim
migrant worker
social security

formats: html pdfa1b print


title: Commission Regulation (EC) No 242/97 of 10 February 1997 amending Regulation (EC) No 2368/96 derogating from and amending Regulation (EEC) No 2456/93 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 as regards the general and special intervention measures for beef

eurovoc_concepts:
Germany
beef
carcase
intervention policy
product quality


title: 97/152/EG: Kommissionens beslut av den 10 februari 1997 om de uppgifter som skall anges i dataregistret över sändningar av djur eller animaliska produkter från tredje land som har blivit föremål för vidaresändning (Text av betydelse för EES)

eurovoc_concepts:
animal product
data processing
import
live animal
re-export
veterinary inspection


title: REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on co- financing of remote sensing checks in connection with agricultural subsidies required under Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 165/94

eurovoc_concepts:
Community budget
administrative check
aid per hectare
co-financing
remote sensing

text: COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 10. 02. 1997 COM(97) 39 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on co-financing of remote sensing checks in connection with agricultural subsidies required under Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 165/94 COMMISSION REPORT TO THE COUNCIL on co-financing of remote sensing checks in connection with agricultural subsidies required under Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 165/94 1. Introduction 1. 1 CAP reform In 1992, Regulation No 1765/921 "reformed" the common agricultural policy (CAP). The reform covers the main arable crops and certain fodder areas and imposes compulsory set-aside of part of the arable crop area. Direct area- based subsidies are paid to farmers, amounting to around ECU 16. 2 billion in 1996. 1. 2 IACS Council Regulation No 3508/922 and Commission Regulation No 3887/923 set up an "integrated administration and control system" (IACS) for Community subsidies granted under the reform arrangements. This system requires farmers in all Member States to submit a standardised annual declaration and involves a computerised database, identification of land parcels declared and animals and integrated control procedures. The rules provide for two forms of control: • • "administrative" i. e. based on the IACS files and databases. These checks, made on all applications, are outside the scope of this report. physical checks, covcri ng a sample of at least 5% of applications selected using criteria set in the rules. 1. 3 Remote sensing This is specifically provided for as a physical checking option (Regulation No 3508/92 Article 8 (4)) at Member States' discretion. The alternative is "traditional" checking by inspection on the spot. All Member States except Luxembourg and Austria decided to use remote sensing in 1996. Remote sensing is in fact a type of on-the-spot checking involving scrutiny of information on the actual use of agricultural parcels during the crop year. This information is however gathered by aircraft or satellite instead of being obtained by visiting the parcels. 1. 4 Development of remote sensing for CAP control purposes The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (IRC) at Ispra in Italy developed the basic techniques used in the Remote Sensing controls, in its MARS Project (Monitoring Agriculture by Remote Sensing) approved by the Council in 1988. The aim at this time was to use satellite imagery to produce European agricultural statistics. Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops (OJ L 181, 1. 7. 92, p. 12) Council Regulation administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes (OJ L 355, 5. 12. 92, p. l) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes (OJ L 391, 31. 12. 92, p. 36) (EEC) No 3508/92 of 27 November 1992 establishing an integrated o^ In 1990 the EAGGF used satellite imagery experimentally to compile a regional inventory for durum wheat in southern Italy and central Greece. This was a purely statistical exercise, i. e. there was no checking of individual farmers or their plots. In 1991, i. e. , before implementation of reform, the EAGGF with JRC help began test checks on individual plots declared. In that year declarations covering durum wheat, five year set-aside, vine grubbing and cotton were checked in Greece, Spain, France and Italy. In 1992, ten Member States used the system for checks on two newly introduced measures: temporary land set- aside4 and temporary aid for oilseeds5. Remote sensing was thus ready for use when CAP reform was implemented in 1993. This both facilitated adoption of the reform (until then the main experience of subsidising on an area basis was with durum wheat, where serious problems had come to light in 1990) and warranted specific mention of the technique in the regulatory provisions. 1. 5 Co-financing Since 1970 Regulation No 729/706 has left the cost of control work to be met by Member States. Remote sensing is however a fairly new and complex technique bound to raise expenditure when first used. Accordingly in a waiver from the general rule Commission Regulations Nos 2069/917 and 615/928 (application rules for temporary land set-aside and for oilseed aid) introduced Community financing of remote sensing checks. Regulation No 3887/92 continued this. Since 1994 it has been the Council itself by a specific Regulation, No 165/949, that has authorised co-financing for five years of jointly organised control programmes. Commission Regulation (EC) No 601/9410 sets the detailed rules. Before 1994 100% of costs were met from the EU budget. From 1994 to 1998 the rate is 50%. A separate appropriation (no co-financing involved) covers centralised image purchasing by the Directorate-General for Agriculture (see below). The EU budget does not co-finance the administrative costs of the programmes. These remain subject to the general rule. All Member States using remote sensing have asked for co-financing. Before 1994 Italy and the regional administration of Andalucia made aerial photography checks that did not form part of the programme and were not therefore co-financed. Council Regulation (EEC) No 1703/91 of 13 June 1991 introducing a temporary set-aside scheme for arable land for the 1991/92 marketing year and laying down special measures for that marketing year under the set-aside scheme provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 797/85 (OJ L 162,26. 6. 1991, p. 1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3766/91 of 12 December 1991 establishing a support system for producers of soya beans and rape and sunflower seed (OJ L 356, 24. 12. 91, p. 17) Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ L 94, 28. 4. 70, p. 13) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2069/91 of 11 July 1991 laying down detailed rules for application of the temporary set-aside scheme for arable land for the 1991/92 marketing year (OJ L 191, 16. 7. 1991, p. 19) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 615/92 of 10 March 1992 laying down detailed rules for a support system for producers of soya beans and rape and sunflower seed (OJ L 67, 12. 3. 92, p. 11) Council Regulation (EC) No 165/94 of 24 January 1994 on co-financing by the Community of remote sensing checks and amending Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 (OJ L 24, 29. 1. 94, p. 6) Commission Regulation (EC) No 601/94 of 17 March 1994 laying down detailed rules for application of Council Regulation (EC) No 165/94 as regards co-financing by the Community of remote sensing checks on agricultural areas (OJ L 76, 18. 3. 1994, p. 20) 10 3 2. Technical description 2. 1 General organisation Farmers are required to submit their annual subsidy applications in prescribed form and by dates set in line with Regulation 3508/92, in general between the end of March and 15 May depending on Member States. Remote sensing allows correct declarations to be picked out so that inspection on the spot can be directed to the others and to problem parcels and its amount and cost reduced accordingly. What actually happens is that satellite images obtained at several dates in the crop year or aerial photos (depending on local conditions) are "photo-interpreted" to allow comparison of the actual situation as revealed by the images with the parcel areas and contents declared by farmers. This work is very specialised and most Member States contract it out. The contractor is involved only in the actual photo-interpretation work. Handling of files upstream and downstream of this is by the national administration. The farmer normally has no contact with the contractor and so no third party enters into his relations with the administration. Calculation of penalties and financial adjustments applying to farmers is never entrusted to the contractor. Table 1 shows the main stages and their times. The times may differ from one Member States and sometimes from one region to another. Table 1 - Main stages ————— Task Choice of control zones, assessment of image requirements Call for tenders, selection of contractors, signature of contracts Selection and administrative processing of applications lodged in chosen zones; transfer of files to contractors Assembly of topographical or IAS documents needed and boundary numbering of parcels declared Acquisition of set of images (by Commission) and/or aerial photos by contractors), processing, geometrical correction etc. Photo-interpretation of parcels to be checked on images or photos Categorisation and return of files and results Inspection on the spot of problem parcels Contractor's report to Administration and discussions of results Period September-November December-March April-June March-June November, March, May, June (August) May-August June-August July-October October-November 2. 2 Tender specifications The Commission organises every year with the Member States a general invitation to tender covering the whole Union. A jointly drawn up specification describes the services required. The invitation and the specification are published in October or November (in 1996: 22 November). 2. 3 Selection of contractors From 1990 to 1992 contracts were concluded directly by the Commission. Since 1993 each Member State selects one or more contractors in agreement with the Commission and then signs a contract under national law. The contract confers entitlement to co-financing. 2. 4 Satellite images The satellites providing usable images for control purposes are SPOT 1, 2 and 3 giving pixel11 dimensions of 10 metres (black and white) and 20 m (colours) and LANDSAT TM 5 (30 m pixel). The new 1RS 1C satellite will give a 5. 8 m b!ack and white pixel in 1997. The black and white and colour images from the various satellites are The pixel is the smallest visible component of the image. 4- interchangeable. For each control zone 4 or 5 images are acquired during the year so that the full vegetation cycle is covered. Experience has shown that centralised purchasing of images by the Commission opens up possibilities inaccessible to individual Member States and avoids disorderly competition for satellite programming. Co-ordination is all the more necessary where control responsibilities are regionalised. In addition substantial price reductions are obtained The EAGGF therefore purchases the images, lends them to the contractors (retaining ownership) and stores them at the JRC at Ispra at die end of the contract The number of satellites available and centralised management by the EAGGF means that the optical images needed are available for most of Europe. Even in cases of serious cloud cover (greatest risk in Northern Europe) radar images taken by the European satellites ERS 1 and 2 (not requiring sunlight and unaffected by cloud cover) can replace the missing optical images with still very acceptable results. These images allow applications for the year in question to be verified and also in certain cases their eligibility as determined by a reference period set in the rules. For instance, archived images found through suppliers' catalogues have been used to check that land declared as "arable" was not on 31. 12. 1991 under permanent pasture, permanent crops or trees or used for non-agricultural purposes (Article 9 of Regulation 1765/92). Such a check is possible only if images free of cloud cover exist for the required period. 2. 5 Aerial photographs Particularly when parcels are small, aerial photos are sometimes used alone or with combination with satellite images. Their pixel is generally 1 or 2 m. Organisation of aerial photography is generally more flexible and decentralised than satellite programming and it has not been considered useful that the Commission take responsibility for photo acquisition. Satellites giving 1 m pixel images are due to operate from 1999 and will be able to replace aerial photos. Aerial photos generally cost more than satellite images for an equal area. It is often difficult to organise successive coverings of a zone, one reason being that photography takes longer. Most of the time one view only is acquired and some crops, e. g. , those already harvested or not yet sown, cannot be checked. This means more site visits to check actual land utilisation, though generally areas do not have to be measured. 2. 6 Acceptance/rejection of applications As with any other control procedure a conclusion must be reached on the eligibility of the application checked. In our case this falls into three distinct stages. • Area and percentage tolerances are applied that have been set in line with the technique used and the national context In all cases the rules make Member States responsible for setting these tolerances. • For each application it is then calculated whether the "crop group"12 found by the photo-interpreter corresponds to that declared. Up to 1995 applications were classed as accepted, rejected or uncertain. Since 1996 two separate gradings are made: accepted/rejected and complete/incomplete. "Incomplete" means that a significant part of the area could not be checked since it was outside the image/photo area, under cloud etc. An application marked as accepted but incomplete is considered as unverified while an application can be rejected even if the check was incomplete. • It is only after contact with the farmer that the national administration accepts, corrects, applies a penalty to or rejects die application under Article 9 of Regulation No 3887/92 depending on the discrepancy found. 3. Achievements 3. 1 Development of techniques Working methods have evolved with time, on the basis of the Commission's experience, suggestions from the Member States and technical progress. For example: 12 A crop group is a set of crops (or land uses) with the same subsidy rate (cereals, oilseeds, set-aside, durum wheat, fodder crops etc. ) • Adjusted rules (consolidation of control responsibilities, remote sensing explicitly scheduled) were introduced only from 1992 and 1993. • In 1993 radar images were used for the first time. • From 1994 use of aerial photography (alone or combined with satellite images) was made available as an option. • From 1994 checking in two stages (autumn-sown and spring-sown crops) was recommended. • From 1995 synergy with IACS has been sought. For example, digital orthophotos or digital files of parcel boundaries are exchanged between the two activities. Control can be gradually extended (as an option) to other sectors: compensatory aid for less favoured areas, agri-environmental measures, vineyard and olive trees registers etc. • To improve database quality the Commission has encouraged ortho-rectification of aerial photos, and this has become general from 1996. Precision of area measurement is improved and these photos can also be used for IACS purposes (or come from IACS as in Ireland and Portugal). • From 1996 technical tolerances can be applied to the parcel instead of the crop group, so bringing decisional criteria closer to those applicable in traditional checks. 3. 2 Volume of work Table 2 shows the Member States' steady growth of interest as reflected in number of zones selected and volume of applications checked. Table 2. Volume of remote sensing co-financed Number of zones selected Number of applications checked in 1996 Satellite Aerial photos alone Satellite alone Aerial photos alone 0 4 13 6 12 4 9 2 21 4 5 4 6 90 3 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 18 0 8 0 0 40 j 0 3,052 1,514 3,602 15,367 0 4,112 0 0 3,110 3,543 0 2,249 36,549 | | 2,007 0 0 0 921 0 1,466 0 37,851 0 7,001 0 0 49,246 Satellite + photos 0 0 1,391 700 1,660 4,177 0 2,045 20,500 0 0 2,621 0 33,094 Total 2,007 3,052 2,905 4,302 17,948 4,177 5,578 2,045 58,35! 3,110 10,544 2,62! 1 2,249 j 118,889 j MS and number of contracts 1996 Belgium (1) Denmark (2) Germany (2) Greece (2) Spain (2) Finland (1) France (2) Ireland (1) Italy (1) Netherlands (1) Portugal (2) Sweden (1) United Kingdom (3 ) TOTAL 1996 Farmers make aiound 3. 06 million applications every year, at least 5% of which must be physically checked In 19% Italy checked 8. 4% of its applications. If this overshoot is discounted for calculation of the average remote sensing covers 63% of the minimum 5%. < 3. 3 Image purchases Table 3 gives the numbers of images bought by the Commission for the control zones indicated in Table 2. Table 3. Image purchases 1994 to 1996 1996 1995 1994 SPOT 390 340 232 LandsatTM 127 155 90 ERS (radar) 33 6 7 Total 550 501 379 3. 4 Application checks: General results Check results from 1993 to 19% are summarised below. "Uncertains" and "incompletes" are not totally comparable. The totals shown do not correspond to those for applications checked (see Table 2) since in certain cases figures for actual application numbers are not available. Table 4. Control results 1993 to 1996 Accepted complete % 1996 (part) 41,492 72. 57% Rejected, complete or incomplete 13,766 Accepted incomplete % % TOTAL 24. 08% 1,914 3. 35% 57,172 1995 1994 1993 Accepted 35,737 24,969 21,462 % 57. 64% 58. 31% 65. 38% Rejected 18,557 11,956 7,658 % 29. 93% 27. 92% 23. 33% Uncertain 7,706 5,896 3,709 % 12. 43% 13. 77% 11. 30% TOTAL 62,000 42,821 32,829 4. Further considerations 4. 1 Analysis of results In 19% the results were: 73% accepted, 23% rejected/complete, 1% rejected/incomplete and 3% accepted/inco mplete. Acceptance and rejection percentages vary widely between Member States, much more owing to the quality of declarations and of the parcel system available to farmers than to locally varying fraud rates. In 1996 accepted applications ranged from 60% to 93% by Member State, in 1995 from 45% to %%. When a farm visit is decided on following a remote sensing exercise the inspector has the parcel and crop group findings accounting for rejection and can target his work accordingly. The number of parcels involved per application is generally fairly small and inspection time can therefore be cut down, particularly when as in certain cases rejection has turned solely on the use of the parcel and it does not need to be measured. His work is also facilitated by the documentation (map and image extracts) received from the contractor for the problem parcels, particularly if the reference mapping for the area is old. 4. 2 Quality control In complement to the contractor's own quality assurance required in every case, a double check on the quahty of contractor's work is also made. The Commission (JRC at Ispra in collaboration with DG VI) checks, to the benefit of and with the agreement of the Member States, a sample of the data received from contractors to ensure that the work was carried out correctly. Member States also make on-the-spot checks of a sample of applications accepted, along with those rejected, to check that the decisional criteria were correctly applied and assess what irregularities are passed over by remote sensing. This approach has no equivalent in traditional control. The aim is adjustment and integration of the different physical control methods so that they are complementary rather than in competition. > In 1995 the JRC made a first test on the data from three contractors. In 19% a IRC subcontractor and the JRC between them tested 11 contractors out of 18. These tests were financed by the JRC budget The test results will be available at the end of 1996 or beginning of 1997 depending on when the data to be tested was transmitted to Ispra. 4. 3 Reliability of results The reliability of remote sensing can be assessed from the JRC's quahty testing (only preliminary results are available) and from the findings of on-the-spot visits sent by the Member State to the contractor and included in his report Usable incomplete results are available only for 1995 and 19%. Gathering this information is a very tricky matter, since the assessment is in part subjective, there are numerous unclassiflable individual cases and the feedback the on-the-spot shecks, sometimes very concise, comes from local officials and can be difficult to interpret • • • Irregularities were confirmed in 42% of the 12 294 applications rejected and then checked on the spot in 1995. In 19% (incomplete figures, 2 545 applications) the figure is 61%. The filter is therefore taking on a reasonable degree of efficiency in that it is not producing too many raise alerts on appUcations that should have been accepted. It is also necessary to check that the filter stops all irregular appUcations, i. e. that appUcations are not accepted that should have been rejected. The checks so far made cannot be termed systematic given the very restricted results available: for 4 contractors in 1995 and 3 so far in 19%. Irregularities were found in 71 out of 241 applications accepted in 1995 and then checked on the spot. These were mainly restricted to two contractors. In 1996 irregularities were found in 24 appUcations out of 198. These figures for a very restricted sample of appUcations and contractors appear to indicate poor interpretation of information or differing views of what constitutes an irregularity. Nor have these percentages been confirmed so far by the JRC's quality control. To clarify matters a minimum volume of verification on the spot of accepted appUcations has now been recommended to all Member States. It should also be noted that some irregularities, over wheat and rape varieties and fallow maintenance, cannot be detected by remote sensing and this may explain certain differences. The contractors sent back 25% of the applications to national administrations for further information or correction before they could be dealt with and were then resent 21% (1995-96 averages). Some of these appUcations were undoubtedly rejected a second time after photo-interpretation, which does not aUow the "corrected" and the "rejected" applications to be added together. Others, after correction of "obvious errors" or additional information, undoubtedly became acceptable. The 4% which were not photo-interpreted were probably checked on the spot even though not credited to remote sensing. From this angle remote sensing is just as or even more effective than traditional control. S. Cost of remote sensing 5. 1 Member States Tables 5 and 6 show the unit costs, separately for sateUite imaging and aerial photography. They vary widely by Member State depending on number of appUcations checked and their size (area) and complexity (number of parcels). The 19% figures are provisional except for number of appUcations. Costs have steadily fallen owing to improvement of techniques and contractor proficiency, increased volume and recentiy availability of IACS databases. There is much less of a steady trend for aerial photography, where the figures for Italy predominate (see Table 2). Italy's technical approach and sectoral coverage has varied very markedly from year to year. In 1994 and 1995 remote sensing checks were basic and foUowed by verification with the farmers, not co-financed. In 19% ortho-rectification, generalised at the Commission's request alone added about ECU 29 per application. r Table 5. Cost trend of remote sensing by satellite, images included, exclusive of VAT No. of applications 69,643 No. of parcels 1,023,771 Area (ha) 2,929,454 Total cost (ECU) 11,320,188 ECU/ application ECU/ parcel ECU/ ha 162. 55 11. 06 3. 86 53,388 42,269 34,674 797,067 472,975 331,567 2,498,218 1,471,363 937,055 9,720,793 8,779,903 8,806,351 182. 08 207. 71 253. 98 12. 20 18. 56 26. 56 3. 89 5. 97 9. 40 1996 (provisional) 1995 1994 1993 Table 6. Cost trend of remote sensing by aerial photography, exclusive of VAT No. of applications 50,146 No. of parcels Area ( ha) 719,236 769,110 Total cost (ECU) 7,154,987 ECU/ application ECU/ parcel ECU/ ha 142. 68 9. 95 46,810 27,426 553,169 285,386 700,953 313,864 4,427,537 2,465,382 94. 59 89. 89 8. 00 8. 64 9. 30 6. 32 7. 85 1996 (provisional) 1995 1994 These costs include purchase of images and aerial photos and the entire remuneration (Member State's and EAGGF contributions) of contractors for their photo-interpretation and appUcation processing work. 5. 2 EAGGF expenditure The EAGGF itself purchases the images. Up to 1994 it met 100% of the cost of contracts, since then 50%. Table 7 summarises these costs. The figures are not precisely comparable with those of tables 5 and 6 since certain expenditure was either not presented or not authorised for co-financing (see § 5. 3) and some remote sensing control work (e. g. vineyard and oUve trees registers) is not included in tables 5 and 6. Some additional work in connection with remote sensing was also financed from the same budget: • • • • a study on precision of measurement of agricultural parcel boundaries (one contract in 1992) costing ECU 31,560; a study on automatic segmentation of parcel boundaries using satelUte images (three contracts in 1992-93) costing ECU 101,910; a study on use of radar images in replacement of optical images (one contract in 1993) costing ECU 26,230; development (following an open call for tenders) of software for the use of remote sensing for control purposes and testing of this by three experienced contractors (ECU 82,800 in 1993, ECU 372,729 in 1994 and ECU 223,506 in 1995). The software (CACHOO) is now being used in Denmark, Finland and Portugal, and by the JRC for quality testing. Table 7. EAGGF expenditure on remote sensing (ECU) Year 1990 (100%) 1991 (100%) 1992 (100%) 1993 (100%) 1994 (100%) 1995 (50%) 1996 (50%, provisional) Total 1990-96 Images (100%) 138,718 73,286 437,022 1,059,482 1,184,134 1,367,966 1,408,662 Application checks 584,500 713,931 4,142,227 7,577,104 8,314,638 7,000,000 9,653,150 Other contracts Total 0 0 31,560 210,940 372,729 223,506 0 723,218 787,217 4,610,809 8,847,526 9,871,501 8,591,472 11,061,812 5,669,270 37,985,549 838,735 44,493,554 9 When Regulatio n 165/94 was adopted the financial statement indicated expenditure of ECU 20 million per year up to 1998 (raised to ECU 21. 5 million by the 1994 Act of Accession). This amount was arrived at from current data: 6 million appUcations, 5% of which to be checked, estimated unit cost ECU 200, remote sensing used for 2/3. On present figures this estimate can be revised downwards. With extended use of remote sensing but lower unit costs an annual amount of ECU 15 million (including images) now appears reasonable. 5. 3 Distribution key The cc-financing rules provided for the available funds to be shared between Member States by a distribution key annexed to Regulations 3887/92 and 165/94. The key has only had to be used in 1993 since in other years appropriations exceeded Member States' eligible requests. In 1993 Greece did not confirm its co-financing request In 1995 Italy's appUcation could be granted at only 48% instead of 50%. The reason was that an additional control programme had been organised by Italy with the Commission's agreement but the information needed by the Commission to aUow it to commit the extra funds was not provided in due time. 6. Cost efficiency 6. 1 Commission study In 19% the EAGGF undertook with JRC support a cost effectiveness study analysing three data sources: contractors' reports on remote sensing (1993 to 1995), the Member States' annual reports on implementation of IACS (1993 to 1995) and a questionnaire to Member States for 1995 covering supplementary checks to remote sensing and traditional checks. Seven Member States and four German Lander agreed to reply. The Commission already had some information on costs for two other Member States. The volume of data available is considerable but is sometimes difficult to interpret or compare. The first results show for the criteria used widely varying situations from one Member State to another and difficulty by some national administrations in calculating the cost of traditional checks and assessing their consistency. The Commission does not wish to risk wrongly interpreting some of the answers to the questionnaires. Moreover as the situation develops - and in general improves - rapidly as IACS becomes firmly implemented, it is often difficult to compare the reports for different years. The Commission accordingly proposes to supplement its analysis with the 1996 results and validate and discuss it in the next few months with the Member States before drawing final conclusions. This additional work should aid the Member States in their choices after 1998 (if cc-financing is discontinued) and also help the Commission in defining its position as that date approaches. 6. 2 ViabiUty In terms of numbers of applications checked (leaving aside questions of relative efficiency) calculation from the gross figures supplied by the Member States shows remote sensing checks (all related costs and VAT included) to be cheaper than traditional checks in Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, one German Land (Saxony), Sweden (1996 only) and Portugal (overall national estimate). Spain and Greece were close to equality between the two methods in 1995 and reached it in 1996. Remote sensing is dearer in France, the United Kingdom and several German Lander. No information on traditional checks is available for the other Member States. The use of remote sensing has been preferentially targeted on appUcations covering a large area (generaUy 1. 5 to 6 times bigger than the IACS average). A calculation in terms of area covered, if possible, would give the advantage to remote sensing in most cases but in the absence of data on areas checked by traditional methods the weighting would be open to question. To the costs shown in Tables 5 and 6 the national administration must add the cost of processing appUcations before and after their handling by the contractor, any purchase of additional information (e. g. cadastral maps supplied to contractors) and on-the-spot checking of rejected appUcations. Lastly, VAT on contract prices is generaUy met by the national administration. This is not a factor for traditional checks. The comparative cost (weighted averages) of traditional checks and of checks before and after remote sensing has been estimated in the aggregate for 1995 and 1996. Table 8 gives the figures. Table 8. Comparison of unit costs per appUcation checked (ECU) Remote sensing average 1995 (8 MS) Remote sensing average 1996 (8 MS) Traditional check average 1995 (9 MS) Administrative preparation of the dossiers Remote sensing contract excl. VAT Images supplied by Commission Check on-the-spot VAT on remote sensing contract Total cost per application Average EAGGF contribution 24 173 24 34 29 284 86 24 164 21 34 28 271 82 31 0 0 198 0 229 0 For those Member States for which 1995 figures are available Table 8 shows that remote sensing checks were on average more expensive, VAT included, but that co-financing offset this. Comparison for the same Member States of the 19% remote sensing and 1995 on-the-spot figures œnfirms this. These averages however conceal widely differing situations from one Member State to another. In 1995 costs for remote sensing ranged from ECU 160 to 714 per application and for traditional checks from ECU 132 to 933. The average area per application checked ranged from 4 to 201 ha by Member State. 6. 3 Comparative efficiency Only Member State statistics arc available for any attempt to analyse comparative efficiency in terms of volume of penalties applied or of irregularities detected. Their figures cover checks following remote sensing and traditional checks and they are contained in the IACS reports. Comparison of their figures without correction would appear to indicate that for three years (1993-95) remote sensing has almost always uncovered fewer problem applications than traditional checks (generaUy 2 to 4 times fewer depending on Member State). In fact when account is taken of the dossiers sent back to the national authorities before remote sensing (see § 4. 3) the difference dwindles and the number of irregularities detected sometimes turns to the advantage of remote sensing. Moreover in terms of areas on which penalties are applied (and not of application numbers) the figures also become more favourable to remote sensing, which checks larger areas and verifies each application more fully. Remote sensing tends to leave more smaU irregularities undetected but this has a very small impact on the areas on which penalties are appUed. It is nonetheless true that risk analysis is less flexible for remote sensing (checks grouped zonaUy, whereas traditional checks can be targeted on isolated appUcations) and that the two types of check differ somewhat in nature: an inspector on the spot can cover points of detail, check elements beyond the scope of satelUte images (e. g. durum wheat and rape varieties, maintenance of fallow etc. ), make corrections in the light of information from the farmer and count animals. 6. 4 Traditional checks on the spot Analysis of cost-effectiveness will necessarily involve comparison with traditional checks. In the IACS reports the Commission receives statistics on the checks made and their results but has Utile information on their actual content and the measuring methods used and tolerances applied. Traditional checks in fact vary widely in character from one country to another and also from one appUcation to another within Member States. In practice traditional checks are restricted by logistical constraints (travelhng time, productivity expected of inspectors) and by the reasonably acceptable duration to a farmer of a routine visit. The average inspection visit duration notified by Member States is about one day. This means that except on smaU farms it is impossible for the inspector to visit all parcels and at least walk round them on foot to make a rough check of their area. Given the time necessarily absorbed by preliminary contacts, document checks and map consultation at the farmhouse, in most Member States, as might realistically be expected, only between 15 and 40% of the parcels are actuaUy visited on the occasion of a traditional check. li In practice unless something arises indicating the need for a thoroughgoing check the inspector making a routine visit selects a sample of parcels to be visited. A selection may of course be very weU judged, on the basis of anomaUes discerned or intuition, but is none the less influenceable by the farmer or physical constraints (access, distance, etc. ). Traditional checks are in some way or another often restricted by the allocation of resources, whereas remote sensing, for which a complete working specification can be given, is as a control both uniform and more objective, even if in certain respects less precise. Clearly if uniformity and objectivity are considered the prime criteria in efficiency in checking remote sensing will be advantageous in most Member States. 7. Summary Remote sensing is now becoming a mature technique. Its feasibility and the grounds for its use are no longer questioned. The volume of applications treated by it exceeds that for the corresponding traditional checks. Thirteen national administrations have been able to employ a large number of contractors on it without major difficulty. Remote sensing has been given special emphasis and co-financed by the Commission, which secs a number of substantial advantages: ils dissuasive effect, essential during the critical sclling-up phase of IACS, the availability of full documentation for each application checked and the possibility of consulting this in case of subsequent dispute, its function as a focal point for reflection on control techniques and finally its more and more evident synergy with the most advanced aspects of IACS. Member States have also had to put up with certain drawbacks. Its technical Umitations for recognition of certain crops, minimum parcel size and cloud cover are well known but there are alternatives: aerial photos and radar images. The need to use contractors and group applications by zone makes management more complex and results in regionally imbalanccd on-the-spot checking. Lastly, the timetable for checking procedures is tight and delays fairly frequent. Some contractors manage however to complete the bulk of their work in three or even two months. This encouragement from the Commission to the Member States has given rise to some transfer of their responsibilities to the Commission. The situation is now moving towards a return of these to the Member States, which have suggested many improvements: use of aerial photographs, two-stage checking, application of parcel tolerances, remote sensing training courses, etc. On the other side of the coin, this support is a valuable source of documentation and a means of monitoring the difficulties encountered and assessing the quality of declarations and national IACS implementation. Co-financing has enabled the Commission to introduce a certain transparency with the Member States on checking by remote sensing. A means is available of securing quality, rigour and equality of treatment in physical checking. This rigour ought also to be imposed on traditional on-the-spot checks, which are carried out in much more variable fashion. It would however increase the cost of these and thus tilt the cost-effectiveness balance with remote sensing. 8. Conclusions The following are the Commission's provisional conclusions that it proposes to refine in the light of data that will shortly be available: final report on the cosl-cffcctivcncss study, analysis of the full results of the 1996 checks and possibly 1997 and conclusions and recommendations from the JRC following its quality control. 1. The Commission proposes to apply Regulation N° 165/94 fully until it expires. It will therefore be asking the budget authority for the appropriations needed for co-financing for 1998. 2. Beyond 1998, if the principle of full Member State responsibility is the only consideration, it is desirable that the Commission ceases all co-financing of remote sensing and the Member States, on the basis of their own cost-effectiveness analyses, decide what techniques to use. UL 3. 4. 5. For the moment it appears essential that the Commission continue after 1998 to be responsible for provision of satelUte images. This will guarantee the present security of supply, maintain the present price advantage and avoid disorderly competition between neighbouring control zones. Image supply, which accounts for less than 10% of the full cost of checking by remote sensing, and the corresponding support could be a direct responsibility of DG VI or the JRC or contracted out to one of the image distributors. Even without co-financing the Commission could continue its support for Member States wishing to avail themselves of it, either as purely technical assistance given by the JRC or as tecruiico-administrative assistance given jointly by DG VI and the JRC. Support could also involve continuing external independent quaUty control after 1998, under procedures to be decided with participating Member States, if demand is sufficient It would appear advantageous to pursue certain types of co-financing at 50% for Member States which, after launching IACS on the basis of an existing land register, wish to improve their IACS arrangements by creating a better or more updated one or by Unking up with other declaratory or control arrangements (e. g. vineyard or olive trees registers). Such action is warranted by both the importance of high quality declaratory and parcel identifiait ion arrangements for the purposes of administrative checks (which have to cover 100% of data) and the multiannual (at least five years) nature of such an investment. a ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 39 final DOCUMENTS EN 03 15 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-036-EN-C ISBN 92-78-15499-7 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg / cf


title: Verordnung (EG) Nr. 241/97 der Kommission vom 10. Februar 1997 zur AEnderung der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1102/89 mit Durchfuehrungsbestimmungen zur Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1101/89 des Rates ueber die Strukturbereinigung in der Binnenschiffahrt

eurovoc_concepts:
fund (EU)
industrial restructuring
inland waterway fleet
inland waterway shipping
push towing
vessel


title: REGLAMENTO (CE) N° 238/97 DE LA COMISIÓN de 10 de febrero de 1997 por el que se modifica el Reglamento (CEE) n° 1627/89 relativo a la compra de carne de vacuno mediante licitación

eurovoc_concepts:
EU Member State
award of contract
beef
intervention buying
product quality