cap monitoring system - european commission...cap monitoring system under the article 40a of eu r....
TRANSCRIPT
CAP monitoring system
under the article 40a of EU R. 809/2014 2018 operational in Italy
by
Francesco Sofia ([email protected]) & Salvatore Carfì ([email protected])
Summary
• Requirements, strategy & preliminary actions (selection zone and scheme)
• Sentinel data involved and other technologies
• FOI, Markers and Scenarios definition and main issues
• Follow up and administrative procedures
• Follow up actions (back office activities and geotagged photos apps)
• Status quo
• Key persons involved and working time
• Conclusions
Where
• Foggia administrative province
• 7,007 sq. km
OBJECTIVE – CAP «Monitoring» procedure
implementation, based on open satellite data for
the generation of markers at agro parcel level and
successive farm level actions through a «traffic-
light» approach
Requirements and strategy REQUIREMENTS – LPIS updated, recovery procedure in
place, LPIS QA, Geospatial application 100%, several
graphical layers added (Pastures, LPIS refresh, Natura
2000, EFA, ELG etc.). Several trainings for AGEA staff and
for the experts from private-public consortium have been
assessed (i.e. DG AGRI and JRC)
STRATEGY – Selection of a continuous area having
different characteristic (arable land, pasture, olive trees and
vineyard). Chosen scheme for monitoring system: BPS
only.
Additional technologies were used as well as others are on
going…
Final decision to apply monitoring was made in July 2018
Foggia (Apulia): the largest Italian province 3 Sentinel-2 frames involved
180+ Sentinel-2 frames processed since 2017 April so far
T33TWF
T33TWG
T33TVG
Sentinel1 series (2017-2018) acquired and processed for S2 support in permanent grassland
Foggia GSAA 2018
• About 635.000 parcels in 2018 GSAA for Foggia province
• High geometric complexity
• 5 municipalities have been included in traditional CWRS
GSAA parcels detail and FOI • Declared parcels have been divided into 14 groups for
which similar analysis rules can be applied => Feature of Interest FOI
• FOI includes agro parcels with similar crops within the same farm block, let separated if:
• With different period of phenology
• With different type and density (UNAR) for permanent crops
• Biological (for follow up only)
• About 200,000 GSAA parcels are not subject to monitor: (forest, urban, etc)
• For each group, different markers and scenarios have been delineated and considered
GROUP AGRICULTURE
PARCELS
% ON
TOTAL
CHECKED
Autumn-winter arable land 117432 26.0%
Spring-summer arable land 30280 4.4%
Vegetables and medicinal plants
arable 4051
2.0%
Autumn grassland (arable) 67 0.0%
Multiyear grassland (arable) 479 0.1%
Multi-season arable land 1978 0.4%
Lying fallow arable land 36672 8.3%
Generic arable land 10043 2.5%
Permament crops (generic) 18843 5.2%
Vineyards 32269 9.0%
Olive trees 113566 26.2%
Permanent grassland 11959 2.6%
P. Grassland pro-rata (20%) 8647 1.3%
P. Grassland pro-rata (50%) 70504 11.9%
Other (not under payment requests) 202310
A complex starting point: parcels size distribution
GROUP
SIZE TOTAL
AGRICULTURE PARCELS
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
< 0.2 ha 0.2-0.5 ha >0.5 ha < 0.2 ha 0.2-0.5 ha >0.5 ha OVER TOTAL
Autumn-winter arable land 30482 17860 69090 117432 26% 15% 59% 25,7%
Spring-summer arable land 8122 4169 17989 30280 27% 14% 59% 6,6%
Vegetables and medicinal plants arable 1463 722 1866 4051 36% 18% 46% 0,9%
Autumn grassland 10 5 52 67 15% 7% 78% 0,0%
Multiyear grassland 322 57 100 479 67% 12% 21% 0,1%
Multiseason arable land 886 313 779 1978 45% 16% 39% 0,4%
Lying fallow arable land 27017 3489 6166 36672 74% 9% 17% 8,0%
Generic arable land 7021 1010 2012 10043 70% 10% 20% 2,2%
Permanent crops 12065 2218 4560 18843 64% 12% 24% 4,1%
Vineyards 14739 5993 11537 32269 46% 18% 36% 7,1%
Olive trees 66266 21898 25402 113566 58% 19% 22% 24,9%
Permanent grassland 5767 1738 4454 11959 63% 14% 23% 2,6%
Pasture pro-rata 4609 1389 2649 8647 53% 16% 31% 1,9%
Pasture pro rata (50%) 47328 9384 13792 70504 67% 13% 20% 15,4%
TOTAL 226097 70245 160448 456790 49,5% 15,4% 35,1% 100%
Selected (according to national law requirements) and «extracted» markers by sentinel
• For each group-FOI, one or more markers have been selected, among:
• Ploughed: ploughed terrain for seeding
• Growth: parcel with growing vegetation
• Vegetation presence: parcel with vegetation
• Activity: presence of management activities in the parcel
• Harvested: parcel harvested
• Mowed: grassland mowed
• Removed: grabbing of permanent cultivation only in some case
Markers and scenarios
• For each group (FOI), one or more of the previous markers have been considered
• Different timing scenarios have been selected, depending on:
• Type of crops: specific activities carried out in different periods of the year (i.e. harvesting or ploughing for winter or summer crops, etc.)
• Geographic location: crop calendars can be different even at national/regional level, depending on the region of interest (climate, altitude, latitude)
• Regulations: some activities are ruled and performed or not performed according to specific periods (grass mowing, land lying fallow cleaning, etc.)
Sentinel multi-temporal time series FOI markers are computed by automatic satellite time series analysis (from summer 2017 so far), through different time windows, according to the pre-selected scenarios
17/06/2018 14/03/2018
11/01/2018 25/10/2017
13/05/2018
06/08/2017
Example of markers and scenarios for autumn-winter crops
MARKERS ANALYSIS WINDOW
Ploughed 15/07/17 – 30/10/17
Presence 01/11/17 – 30/04/18
Growth 01/11/17 – 30/04/18
Harvested 01/05/18 – 30/06/18
• For this group and FOI, the following markers have been considered: • Ploughing
• Presence
• Growth
• Harvested
• The following temporal windows and scenarios have been considered:
Autumn-winter crops: summary SIZE 3 MARKERS 2 MARKERS 1 MARKER 0 MARKER NOT COMPUTABLE
0,01-0,2 12747 3677 3226 776 511
0,2-0,5 13892 2278 1435 255 0
>0,5 58063 8480 2296 251 0
TOTAL 84702 14435 6957 1282 511
Markers and scenarios for Spring-summer crops
MARKER ANALYSIS WINDOW
Ploughing 01/01/18 - 31/5/18
Growth 01/05/18 - 30/9/18
Presence 01/05/18 - 30/9/18
Harvested 01/07/18 - 31/10/18
• For this group, the following markers have been considered: • Ploughing
• Presence
• Growth
• Harvested
• The following temporal windows have been considered for indicators computation:
Spring-summer crops: summary SIZE 3 MARKERS 2 MARKERS 1 MARKER 0 MARKER NOT COMPUTABLE
0,01-0,2 1566 1455 1523 932 128
0,2-0,5 2042 1056 743 328 0
>0,5 11176 3584 2527 702 0
TOTAL
14784
6095
4793
1962
128
Ortofoto Agea 2016
Immagine S2 A 17/07/2017
Immagine S2 A 08/04/2018
Immagine S2 A 02/07/2018
Immagine S2 A 10/09/2018
ID GSAA parcel: 110842491
Area: 0,28 ha
Olive 062 – 420 LPIS cod: grubbing evidence
Permanent crops – Olive groves: grubbing
Red: mean olive groves curve on 140 verified parcels (VHR 2018)
Blue: grubbing signal*
Vineyard 061 – 410 LPIS cod – marker/scenario: M62
ID GSAA parcel: 110842493
Area 0,29 ha
Rapid vineyard renovation (grubbing and re-plantation of different variety)
Ortofoto Agea 2016
Immagine S2 A 17/07/2017
Immagine S2 A 08/04/2018
Immagine S2 A 02/07/2018
Immagine S2 A 10/09/2018
Permanent crops – Vineyards: grubbing
Red: mean vineyards curve on 200 verified parcels (VHR 2018)
Blue: grubbing-re-planted behaviour
Permanent grassland pro-rata – 110 – 63 cod (M81)
Image S 2 A 13/05/2018
ID parcel: 510330188
Area 10,5 ha
Image S 2 A 29/03/2018
Image S 2 A 15/09/2018
Typical behaviour of a grassland pro-rata in Mediterranean region
Summer dryness and/or grazing contribution
Limitations using Sentinel automated procedure
• If the crop is present only on a part of the parcel or FOI, output can be fully negative, as for parcel
115553699
139188690
498028139
Not Presence
Presence
Markers Presence
Image Date 14/03/2018
Crop Wheat
115553699
An interpretation passage can solve the issue…but…
Too much wide FOIs could affect negatively
the automatic response, increasing the yellow numbers or the false positives
• Permanent crops, pasture pro-rata and non eligible areas: => systematic monitoring through LPIS refresh (based on a cycle of 3 years). Sentinel results are marked in IACS/LPIS for the next updated process
• Parcels less 0.2 ha are problematic to managed by Sentinel
Geo-tagged system linked to AGEA IACS databases
19
Land parcels always
delimited by yellow lines
Vertical blue sticks indicate
the parcels vertices
Precise “photo cones”
identification of, in this case:
Arable 666 (left)
Water 690 (ditch in the middle)
Wooded road 650 (centre)
Each other colour of the lines
(pink, brown, violet, etc)
correspond to the different
downloaded LPIS codes
eGEOS Mobile-enabled App:
- Take validated GSSN pictures with anti-fraud controls
- both surveyors and farmers
- On-line and off-line working (matching through sequential codes)
RFV, crop diversification, durum wheat detection, EFA, grassland mowing proof, permanent crops change, RD measures, …insurances, etc.
3° STEP
Follow-up and administrative procedure
• Periodic and systematic procedure to observe and evaluate the CAP eligibility criteria and the other
obligations which can be monitored starting from Sentinel Copernicus;
• Follow-up activities where necessary, to finalize the requested subsidies admissibility;
• Beneficiaries information over the monitoring performance decision through adequate communication
tools (requested information and proofs);
2° STEP 1° STEP
FLAGS
GENERATION
SATELLITE
MARKERS/SCENARIOS
EVALUATION
EXPERT
SURVEYORS
INTERVENTION
PAYMENTS
PROCEDURES FOLLOW-UP
PARCELS/ FARMS
ECONOMIC
IMPACTS
TRAFFIC
LIGHTS
OUTPUTS
MANDATORY
POSSIBLE
Final outputs simulation as monitored in the farmer payments
* Farms subjected to 5% sampling and relative follow up
Description No Farmers %
Farm to pay (green and range low) 28.288 91,7%
Farmers to pay (green and and range medium)* 1.289 4,2%
Farmers in follow-up 1.262 4,1%
Farms in follow up (flashing blue light) still under evaluation: a possible reduction is expected
Overall view of the monitoring system methodology
Preparation of signal marks according the EU and national eligible requirements
Plan activities and developed IT requirements to integrated in the IACS processes
Arable land (BPS requirements) by Sentinel
Permanent crop and pasture pro-rata to monitor by LPIS refresh with cycle 3 years
(+ recovery procedure)
Automatized software investigation by a monitoring control system
Analysis of follow-up cases found
Preparation of correlated operational action plan activities
Follow-up cases by photo-interpretation back office and support automatized
documentation provided by the farmers
Geo-tagged and rapid visit if it’s the case
Amendments of the applications and final meetings with the farmers
Status quo • Finalized activities:
1. AGEA web promotion, booklets, newsletter (“Circular”) and operating instructions;
2. Development of flags generation;
3. Methodology developed for the follow-up yellow cases procedure (i.e. back office, rapid field visit, geo-tagged)
4. Communication to farmers;
5. Training to local Farmers/Centres of Agriculture Assistance (CAA)
• Activities to be concluded (on going)
1. Follow-up (interpretation flashing blue parcels, RFV, geo-tagged on field, etc.);
2. Operational phase for the potential amendments of the GSAA
3. Final results for the calculation of the payments;
4. Payments
Key persons involved and working time
• The project, after the AGEA letter sent to the Commission, started at mid July 2018, so after the GSAA submission
• Key persons: remote sensing experts in agriculture, modelling experts, SW engineers and IACS data base experts, informatics, CAP photo-interpreters and ground surveys for geotagged
• The multi-temporal satellite analysis provided output for winter crops in August while for summer crops at mid October (always in iteration every 10-20 days… from end of July to end of October)
• Overall person days calculation is under evaluation although a first estimation can be consider on 1,000 WDs (93% of the entire monitoring process have been developed)
Conclusions
• Arable land monitoring BPS requirements works properly
• Buildings, cement platforms, rock excavations (e.g. clay, silt) can not be automatically classified by S2 simple IRFC
• Not eligible areas, permanent crops and pasture pro-rata monitored by LPIS refresh
• Follow-up yellow cases to refresh by photo-interpretation back office activities (to reduce the number of investigation cases based of rapid visit or geo-tagged)
• On-going comparison of the DG AGRI/JRC technical specification/working documents monitoring done (and on going) by AGEA monitoring system methodology (considering that the specifications was published later AGEA has developed process)
• Farmers dissemination/learning activities to improve their pro-active involvement and relationship with the Paying Agencies to achieve goals to collect digital documentation support and/or geo-tagged guided pictures
Questions… further information?