{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

Several spatial planning regulatory instruments are in force in the Alento study site.

Spatial planning policy instruments and actors

Source: Authors

Urban expansion and construction are regulated by a complex set of laws that lack uniformity and cohesion. Laws are applied via a series of instruments - i piani urbanistici – which can be formulated and managed by town Councils, the Province, or the Region, in addition to some State administrations, depending on the location and scope of planned construction and the extent of the council’s authority.  

Since 1942, planning in Italy has been divided into two levels: urban/municipal (General Regulatory Plans) and territorial/regional – provincial (Piano Territoriale di Coordinamento and Piano Territoriale Paesistico). In 1971, the Italian regions were given the authority to pass their own regional laws on urban planning.

The official procedure for urban planning authorisation in Italy resembles a pyramidal organisation, although it is not strictly hierarchical. The State is at the top of the planning authorisation triangle and the Regions, Provinces, Town Councils, Park Authorities, and Basin Authorities are at the base.

Hierarchy of Spatial Planning Procedure

Source: Authors

The instruments of spatial planning can be divided into two groups:

• general planning instruments are those provided by National and Regional urban planning laws and fall under the competency of local authorities; the region, province, or town council;
• specialized planning instruments refer to landscape conservation and environmental protection laws.

General and Specialized Urban Planning Instruments

Source: Aiuthors

Implementation, Impacts, Effectiveness of of spatial planning policy

The adoption of territorial and urban planning instruments is the responsibility of the region, province, and town councils. Territorial and urban planning is carried out through the creation of spatial plans with the participation of the authorities in charge of safeguarding different specific interests. All functions relative to the governing of the local territory, which are not explicitly assigned to the region or provinces, are delegated to town councils.

The implementation of planning instruments in Alento has produced several positive impacts such as the Protection of the local territory and valorization of natural and archeological resources, the diffusion of tertiary sector activities, production and recreational activities, the absence of environmentally damaging pollutant industries, funding to areas under Park protection and the even distribution of accommodation structures, housing, and centres of production.

Critical issues which current regulations have failed to address include degradation of inhabited areas along the coast, diffusion of unauthorized housing along the coast, over-development of touristic residences, under-development of accommodation structures in buildings of particular historic or architectural value, no cover of urban planning in the valley area Valle dell’Alento, excessive administrative fragmentation and excessive fragmentation of municipalities in the local territory, insufficient application of new sustainable technologies and innovations in the field of energy production, waste, and water management.  

Urbanized areas have consistently increased over the last fifty years. 

Surface of urbanized areas in 1960 - 2010 in the Alento study site

Source: Authors

The plans in place in the local area (the Park Plan, Landscape Protection Plan, Spatial Plan of Coordination) are characterized by the re-interpretation of the territory according to its different identities. Interviews with stakeholders from the Cilento and Vallo di Diano National Park have revealed strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses include:

1. constraints imposed by the Park. Some view the Park as an obstacle, particularly to the construction sector. In others cases, the Park is seen as a missed opportunity to achieve its full potential, as many operators in the local agro-alimentary industry maintain that the environmental protections put in place by the Park have little benefit for producers.
2. Difficulty in dialogue with local bodies; particularly the case in the smallest town councils and communities in the study area.
3. Difficulty in accessing financial aid; there remains a significant level of ignorance regarding the different types of funding and subsidies available to local businesses.
4. Inefficiency of infrastructure and transport networks; this is in part due to the inherent geographic position and characteristics of the local area, particularly inland. Local companies face huge costs for transport, which is particularly problematic for easily perishable local produce.

Strengths to have emerged from stakeholder interviews can be summarized as follows.

1. Typicality and quality of local production (wines, olive oil, cheeses, meats, etc.) which can be further promoted within the local tourism industry to produce a greater synergy between the two industries.
2. Historic Cultural and Archeological Patrimony: The area’s cultural patrimony, although not yet valorized to its full potential, is an important resource to the Park territory.
3. Opportunities since the creation of the Park of Cilento; sectors aside from construction or with other intrusive environmental impacts benefit from the creation of local brands that can compete for titles of official recognition (e.g. especially products in the agro-alimentary sector).

Problems in reference to the efficiency of the aforementioned planning instruments are related to the perceived lack of organization and “understanding” between the Campania region and other bodies (the Park authority, the local town councils). Another significant problem is the lack of concrete land management plans in the Alento area which are not subject to misinterpretation or uncertainties.

In some cases, within the boundaries of the National Park, spatial planning policies are seen as too restrictive and non-conducive to economic development. On more than one occasion, local residents have questioned the Park’s zoning criteria and have repeatedly requested that the areas within the municipality which are heavily urbanized, densely inhabited, or home to touristic structures, extensive cultivations, etc. be included in the category of “bordering areas”. This designation would be in line with the effective environmental needs of such areas. In other cases, the regulatory framework for urban planning is seen as too weak and ineffective in the face of mass unregulated construction.   

{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

Tourism in Italy represents a key sector involving social, economic and environmental aspects. Besides the strategic role of tourism for the Italian economy, the related policies are relatively recent and have been fully developed in the last two decades. Though tourism is not mentioned in the Italian Constitution, it involves so many sectors at all levels of the national administration that the national administration has implemented administrative structures and agencies, such as the ENIT (national agency for tourism).

The national legal framework for tourism is represented by Law no. 135/2001 for development and promotion in Italy. This law establishes the Central State as the authority to supervise tourism policy and promotion and at the same time empowers the Italian regions ruling and administrating the tourism sector according to the administrative structure of the national administration.

Tourism policies is also regulated by Regional Laws defining Tourism Local Systems, drawing guidelines for the promotion and development of the sector and defining the roles of regional and local administrations, regional agencies and local associations.  Other laws relate to accommodation services and hotels, rural tourism, the Regional Tourism Observatory, tourism professions and quality branding for the tourism accommodation services.

At national level, the main objective is the development of strategies to overcome existing disparities between regions in the tourism sector through the planning of tourism development in accordance with national economic programmes and the principles of the European Union funds. Another important objective is the promotion of Italian tourism abroad and the development and financing of local tourism systems. At the national level, the Government is the main actor in implementing tourism policy, represented by the Department for Development and Competitiveness of Tourism of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. The main activities are supervising tourism policy and promotion, promoting co-operation and harmonization in local tourism development policies between regions and generally supporting the regions in terms of: programming and developing tourism activities at regional and local levels; promoting strategic marketing activities; managing European Structural Funds; performing tasks related to the regional tourism structures; performing tasks related to enterprises and tourism professions.

Agri-tourism laws were first introduced in Italy in 1983. According to the the legal framework "agri-tourism activities are defined as individual farmers or partnerships and associations of farmers with shared capital, offering third parties restaurant services and/or temporary lodgings which are directly connected with the farm’s activities in the agricultural, forestry or animal husbandry sector.". Regional laws which impose strict criteria and limitations on agri-tourism activities in the territory.

Farmers, farming family members and/or other farm employees with part-time or full-time work contracts may be employed in agri-tourism enterprises on the provision that contracts are made under the mansion of ‘agricultural worker’ and are stipulated under the same fiscal code, insurance and benefits regime as the law provides for this mansion. External workers are permitted exclusively for mansions involving complementary services or activities.

Agri-tourism activities can be carried out exclusively in pre-existing farm buildings which are of no longer use to the activities of farming. Funding is provided via the Italian regions under the European Union’s Rural Development Funds.

Implementation, impacts, effectiveness of Agri-Tourism Policy (Alento)    

The first agri-tourism law in the Campania region dates from 1984 and regulates the development of touristic structures in rural areas; rural areas in the vicinity of archaeological sites; the production and marketing of typical local products; the cultural and folkloric traditions of the local agricultural community. The law appoints town councils with the task of checking the suitability and eligibility of agri-tourism enterprises within their territory and keeping relevant records. After revision, regional law has instituted a regional technical committee for agri-tourism which promotes and incentivizes interventions for the sector.

Regional aims of the policy include development of the agricultural and forestry sectors; counteracting the rent of rural exodus; creation of employment, particularly for women and young people; restoration and valorisation of local patrimony; preservation of natural resources, the local environment and landscape; promotion of traditional local agricultural products and craftsmanship from rural areas; restoration and valorisation of traditions and cultural patrimony; strengthening relationships between urban areas and the countryside; education and knowledge-transfer of agricultural activities; setting-up agri-tourism structures directed towards hunting activities.

The Campania region is the main policy implementer, responsible for approving and assigning funding available under agri-tourism measures based on national criteria. Controls and eligibility of agri-tourism structures within each region are carried out by individual town councils, also responsible for applying sanctions for infractions of regulations. Local farmers are the policy beneficiaries.

According to Regional Law, farmers who wish to start an agro-tourism enterprise must present their proposal to the local town Council. Following the proposal, the town Council carries out the necessary checks. In the case of serious infractions and/or irregularities, the Council has the right to suspend all activities relating to the agri-tourism until corrections are made within the regulatory time frame. The Council is responsible for ensuring that all proposals and the necessary accompanying documentation for new agri-tourism enterprises are sent to the local competent Provincial and Regional offices.

The main financial policy instrument is Measure 311 “Diversification to non-agricultural activities” of the Campania region’s Rural Development Plan 2007-2013. The measure provides more than 30 million euro of subsidies to farmers and farming families which amount to total investments of around 62 million euro.

In 2010, there were 53 agri-tourism enterprises in the Alento study site out of a total of 5,136 farms (1%). The total number of agri-tourism enterprises in the Campania region in 2010 was 849 out of a total of 136,872 farms (0,6%).

Farms that have diversified into agri-tourism register lower profits than traditional farms, due in great part to the higher costs involved in diversification, especially in terms of labour costs. Agri-tourism farms have a greater number of employees, particularly external/non-family workers, irrespective of the farm size. Agri-tourism farms also prove to be more compatible with the environment as compared with traditional farming systems, e.g. money spent on chemical fertilizers and pesticides is lower than that of traditional farming systems. Agri-tourism farms also value the rural landscape more highly and consider it to be a crucial factor for attracting tourists into rural areas. In short, agri-tourism farms represent an alternate to the industrialisation of agriculture; good environmental and social practices are paramount objectives to agri-tourism farms, whereas maximising profitability is considered perhaps less important than the creation of jobs and the preservation of the rural landscape.

{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

Measure 216 provides farmers with a financial incentive for carrying out capital works on agricultural land in the form of Non-Productive Investments. The objectives of the measure are:

• to mitigate impacts of agriculture on the environment
• reduce conflict between agricultural activities and the need for habitat and species safeguards
• conservation of natural spaces, providing the maintenance or reconstruction of landscape elements (also with value as ecological corridors)

These objectives are carried out through five actions:

1. Planting or restoration of hedgerows and woodland strips
2. Restoration and/or extension and dry stone walls, terraces and pre-existing embankments
3. Creation of vegetation buffer zones  along water courses; creation of ecological corridors
4. Requalification of wetlands along river banks or in agricultural matrix
5. Prevention of damages to land caused by wolves and wild boar

Maximum available support is €200,000 for private individual farmers or associations and €500,000 for public bodies. Measure 216 is used in combination with measure 214 on agri-environmental payments.

Measure 216 is implemented under the “Territory Conservation” objective of Italy’s National Strategy Plan for rural development to address land abandonment in rural areas of high natural or traditional landscape value, but with marginal economic gain to farmers (e.g. olive groves in LFAs), particularly after after the decoupling of direct payments to olive farmers (2003 CAP reform). Italy has one of the highest budgets for Measure 216 in the EU 27 with total public expenditure of 250 million euro for the period 2007-2013. However, until 2011, Italy’s total expenditure was a little under 20 million €.The principal reasons for Italy’s (and other countries') low payments 216 are delays in initial implementation and the large amount of pending payments where funding has been granted, but not yet received by farmers (either because they have not yet completed capital works or there are cases of overbooking in their regions).

Output indicators of Measure 216 are number of farms and holdings receiving support and total volume of investment. Impact indicators are % of total UAS characterized by effective land management (biodiversity, water and soil quality, conservation of agricultural and forestry habitats). 

The first call for proposals for the measure (2009) received only one successful application, suggesting that not enough information had reached the farmers in the region. However, after information was disseminated, the number of successful applications was 183 with a total budget of more than €31M € (97% of planned budget, November 2012). However, actual payments for the same period were less than 40% of the funding approved. Most of the funds are directed to action B. Restoration and/or extension and dry stone walls, terraces and pre-existing embankments.

Twenty-one applications have been granted funding within the Alento study site, all under Action B “Restoration and/or extension and dry stone walls, terraces and pre-existing embankments”. Total allocated funding is approx. €2.8M (avg. €133,000 per applicant). The total surface area under the intervention of Measure 216 is 195.50 hectares. Of this area, around 75%, or 146 hectares are classified to varying degrees as areas at risk of landslides.

Given the total volume of investment in the Alento study site under Action B of Measure 216 and the skilled nature of the work and specialist materials required in the reconstruction and maintenance of terraces, it can be anticipated that the construction industry in the study site will see an increase in paid work of skilled manual laborers and the builders' merchants sales of the stones needed for dry-stone terrace reconstruction.

The main policy implementers are

• Agenzia per le Erogazione in Agricultura (AGEA) acting as Paying Agency. In the absence of a regional paying agency, the accredited paying agency for the Campania region is the national agency AGEA. Functions of AGEA are officially delegated to the Campania regional Council making them fully responsible to AGEA for the correct management and execution of all tasks.
• The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MIPAAF) acting as Managing Authority (MA). On the basis of Italy’s National Strategy Plan, the regions set out their own RDPs and appoint a regional “Autorità di Gestione” (Managing Authority) which is responsible for carrying out the physical and financial implementation of the region’s rural development programmes. In the Campania region, the Managing Authority is the President of the Regional Executive Committee who, for efficiency and streamlining purposes, delegated all managerial responsibilities to the Coordinator of the Area
• STAPA Ce.PICA (STAPA -Settore Tecnico Aministrativi Provinciali Agricoltura-Provincial Technical-Administrative Sector and Ce.PICA Centri Provinciali di Informazione e Consulenza in Agricoltura-Provincial Centres of Information and Consultation for Agriculture) acting as implementing body.  STAPA  Ce.PICA has inherited the role of ex-Agriculture Inspectorate of the MIPAAF and is the office to which all applications for financial support are made, with the further responsibility of carrying out administrative controls of the region’s RDP.
• Monitoring Committees, at the national and regional level.

In the case of Measure 216 in the Alento study site, the disproportion between applications for funding and the economic resources assigned to the measure should be highlighted. Requests for funding reconstruction of terraces so greatly outweighed the economic funds assigned to the measure that calls for proposals were closed only halfway through the programming period (2010).

The objectives of rural development polices and their effectiveness at responding to the diverse needs of rural systems could be improved by guaranteeing the participation and inclusion of all potential beneficiary groups which necessitates the inclusion a learning and collaboration process involving all local policy stakeholders. Without full stakeholder participation, there is a risk that funding is directed exclusively towards those powerful actors or that ultimately the interventions would not have a real effectiveness in terms of economic, societal and environmental benefits. The consultation process (with economic and social partners as well as monitoring committees of the policies) provides an arena in which shared objectives and concerns can be aired and, more importantly, allows all actors to become more invested in the successful attainment of the policy objectives. As a result, the regular and open communication between stakeholders and institutions helps improve the coordination of the Rural Development Plan and higher level rural development polices.
Another limitation regarding policy effectiveness is the difficulties in crossing sectoral boundaries in the rural systems during the process of policy delivery. One possible solution to this is the involvement of diverse sectors of government in policy implementation, with a focus on policy coordination and cohesion of policy delivery approaches and procedures. Coordination of the various programs operating at a local level is also vitally important to integrating different policies into the framework of a local development strategy. Local rural development approaches are often based on decentralised models of implementation which require greater competencies and responsibilities of local actors. Provincial level institutions and local partnerships must, therefore, be helped to form strong strategic capabilities though greater support, training and exchange of good practices through local networks. 

Actors in the Implementation of Measure 216 Campania Region

Source: Authors

{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

The decoupling of direct aid to olive oil producers under the Single Payment Scheme (SPS) follows the general EU CAP goals. In considering the application of SPS to the olive oil sector, special attention was paid to the socio-economic role of olive oil farming to EU Member States as the EU is the largest producer and consumer of olive oil in the world as well as olive farming’s environmental role in maintaining cultural landscapes.

The formulation of agricultural policy for Italy, as for all EU Member States, comes directly from the EC through the Common Agricultural Policy. Thus, the Single Payment Scheme for olive producers was introduced under EC Council regulation no.1782/2003 and became effective starting from the 2005/06 harvest.

The main policy implementer is the Italian Ministry for Agricultural and Forestry Policies (MIPAF) as the competent national body defining “good environmental conditions” (GAEC) After Ministerial Decree (2004) a two level system was introduced: the national government would provide a general framework for the regulation, in particular the obligations concerning the statutory management requirements and GAEC, while the regional governments would be able to define more precise standards for GAEC.

Various agents acts as intermediary implementers of the SPS, including the national paying agency for agriculture, regional councils and provincial level administrative offices as well as the formal and intermediary implementers of cross-compliance measures.

The 2003 reform of CAP was based on four principal policy instruments:

1. Establishment of Single Payment Schemes to replace most existing direct aid payments, resulting in subsidies that are decoupled from production.
2. Cross-compliance measures making the granting of aid dependant on good farming practices, environmental condition of land, animal health and welfare and food safety. minimum requirements for good agricultural and environmental conditions are defined by Member States.
3. Compulsory mechanism to reduce all payments exceeding 5,000 euro per year by a fixed percentage “modulation”.
4. A financial discipline mechanism to ensure that the amounts agreed upon for the financing of Pillar I of the CAP are not exceeded in any year.

“Payment entitlements” are granted by the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry (MIPAFF), in the general context of “national ceilings” of aid set at EU level, based on average amounts of direct payments to farmers over the reference period from 1999-2002 (or 1999-2003 for olive farmers). Italy chose a fully decoupled historic model to calculate entitlements: each farmer is granted payment entitlements based on the average amount received for the reference period and the average number of hectares farmed during that period under any of the former coupled support schemes (the reference area). Italian olive farmers were to receive 95% of average production linked-payments received in reference years from 1999-2003 with the remaining 5% allocated to officially recognized olive Producer Organization (PO) for financial support for quality, traceability, market and environmental programs.

Further changes under the 2009 Health Check included strengthened decoupling, increased modulation and division of cross-compliance measures into mandatory and optional categories. Member States have been strongly encouraged, though not legally obligated, to move their SFP model towards a flat-rate per hectare payment per region and away from the historically-based model that some Member States, including Italy, had implemented.

Therefore, two options are currently available to Italy: “regionalization” (splitting the national budget ceiling amongst yet to be defined “regions”) and varying degrees of “approximation” (reduction of disparities by giving the same value of entitlements to all farmers at a yet to be defined by Member States “appropriate geographical level” and/or institutional and administrative structure/regional agricultural potential). Both options seem to lead to significact income reduction for olive farmers.

Implementation, impacts, effectiveness

The main policy implementer is AGEA as Paying Agency. At regional and local levels, CAAs (Centro di Assistenza Agricola) act as intermediaries between farmers and AGEA. Applications for direct payments are made to a local CAA which prepares, validates and forwards applications for payments. There are five CAA offices in the Campania region making support for EU payments applications accessible to all farmers within the region. AGEA is also responsible for the implementation of the control system of SPS schemes (spot checks) as well as applying sanctions for breaches in cross-compliance.

In addition to the general framework of national statutory management requirements for GAEC, each region has produced a list of relevant issues for soil protection and minimum level of maintenance to include in GAEC. Specific standards for olive farming in the Campania region include minimum pruning timetables and minimum maintenance of olive groves with the removal of potentially damaging brush or other infesting vegetations. 

Interviews highlighted that one of the principal problems facing olive farmers is the high costs of production due to the impossibility to mechanically harvest olive trees on such hilly terrain.  Given the relatively low profitability of olive production in the study site due to the costs and limitations imposed by the natural landscape, stakeholders have confirmed that the security of constant income support irrespective of production levels since decoupling has  provided study site olive farmers with an incentive to  reduce if not cease production. As a result, stakeholders also confirmed that there has been a growing abandonment of olive groves in the study area, thereby evoking serious environmental concerns e.g., the collapsing of terraces because of a lack of maintenance, causing significant soil erosion and threats to slope stability. The introduction of the SPS in Alento is seen to have increased abandonment of olive groves.

With regard to cross-compliance, despite computerized systems to cross check applications and computerized aerial photography systems, policing remains incredibly challenging. Even once infractions have been identified, sanctions (applied after warnings) represent a small percent of subsidies, not acting as deterrents.  In areas such as Alento, where commercial olive growing is now uneconomic, it is essential that investments be directed towards the increased mechanization of olive farming, avoiding the need for replanting age old olive groves.

{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

The legislation governing greenhouses in the Campania includes several regional laws. Greenhouses are structures suited to creating optimal agronomic conditions for the development and production of vegetable and fruit crops and flowers in seasonal or continuous cycles. Such structures are considered as land improvement investments.

The use of stone walls or the use of prefabricated panels, whose assembly requires building works or technical installation and cannot be immediately and easily dismantled are strictly prohibited. The side covers and roofs of the greenhouses must be made from materials which allow for a clear visibility of the crops inside. Greenhouse structures must be equipped with suitable drainage systems for rainfall, rainfall collection systems, and irrigation water that the structure uses.

The construction of greenhouses in areas is subject to constraints imposed directly or indirectly by state and regional laws or requirements of urban planning instruments.

Actors involved in policy implementation

Source: Authors

The Campania region sets out the areas where greenhouse construction is permitted and decides the technical character and prerequisites of greenhouses based on the following parameters: anchorage, materials used, collection of rainwater, and typology of greenhouse construction.

In 2010, the Alento area included 13 farms with greenhouses, which were mainly used for vegetable crops. These greenhouses covered a total surface area of 17.36 hectares (source Istay, 6th Agricultural Census). The majority of greenhouses are concentrated in Castelnuovo Cilento and on the low-lying plains bordering the township of Velina.  

The funding provided for the construction, re-structuring, or modernization of greenhouses for agricultural use under measure 121 of the Campania Region’s Rural Development Plan 2007-2013 is dependent on local farmers putting interventions into place to help improve the environment (hedges, wooded paths, etc.) and/or to save water or energy resources through the use of renewable energy sources. As such, the potentially damaging environmental impacts of the construction of greenhouses has been somewhat alleviated.

Laws governing greenhouse construction are aimed towards the safe-guarding and valorization of agricultural areas. In Campania, legislation allows for a maximum greenhouse coverage of 70% of a farm’s surface has functioned as safeguard against increased soil sealing.

{xtypo_alert}Editor's note 6Jun14: Sources D142-4{/xtypo_alert}

Regional and national legislation regarding the agricultural use of oil-mill waste water (OMW) falls under the mandate of much wider national and international water protection frameworks. Use of OMW is regulated by national legislation, while regions have several responsibilities for regulating the agricultural use of OMW including mandatory conditions of preventive announcements of OMW and mandatory monitoring programs.

The disposal of by-products and residues created during the process of olive oil extraction continues to pose significant problems to Mediterranean countries. While solid and semi-solid olive residues are commonly used in olive by-products, residue water from olive oil extraction, must be first treated. Treatment of OMW is expensive and requires special plants. Given that most olive mills are small, often family owned affairs which are scattered across olive growing regions, it is impractical if not impossible for each mill to have water treatment facilities. OMW is also produced in great quantities in very short periods of time (during the olive harvest season) making treatment processes even more problematic.

Italian law (574/96) on OMW disposal allowed spreading of waste waters on agricultural land under strict guidelines to prevent polluting effects of the high organic content of olive mill waste water on soils and water. In addition, all Italian regions with more than fifty olive mills have to carry out monitoring programs on soil and eventual water sources affected by OMW spreading. The Campania region has also produced its own “Technical Guidelines”.

The Italian Ministry of Agriculture is the formal implementer of regional policies regulating the agricultural use of OMW. However, individual regional resolutions regulating the agricultural use of OMW delegate implementation to local town councils.

Implementation, impacts, effectiveness of Agricultural Use of Oil Mill Waste Water (Alento)

The Campania region hosts almost 10% of Italy’s olive oil mills. The most environmentally and economically sound method of disposing of OWM and residues is the process of “spreading” or “fertigation”, whereby waste products are applied to soils. The large proportion of organic matter and wide range of nutrients found in olive processing waste products can improve soil fertility; however, its high phenol, lipid and organic acid concentrations can also turn it into a potential phototoxic material and pose a threat to the quality of soil, surface and sub-surface water. Under regional resolution OMW is used exclusively for agronomic use after consideration of pedo-geomorphic, hydro-geological and agro-environmental characteristics of proposed sites, in line with the safeguarding surface and groundwater. Restrictions are in place with regard to types of soils, OMW products that may be used for fertigation, the quantity of OWM per soil surface area.

All farmers intending to dispose of OWM through agronomic use must follow a thorough application process which includes: signed declarations of intent from olive mills’ legal representatives as well as land owners; technical assessment reports from experts; proof of adequate and secure storage facilities and form of transportation for OWM and proposed timetables for the spreading of OMW. All applications are made to the local town council

The Campania Regional Environmental Agency (ARPAC) is responsible for monitoring the positive and/or negative environmental impacts of the agricultural use of OWM on affected soil and, subsequently, on water quality through its three times a year monitoring program. Close monitoring is carried out on a selected sample of sites where OWM is spread on agricultural land and includes annual readings of principal chemical, physical and bio-chemical parameters of soil and water samples. Water quality in the Alento study site has been classified as good by ARPAC (ARPAC, 2001-2002).

The introduction of policy regulating the spreading of OMW on agricultural land in 1996 helped olive farmers in the study area to some degree by reducing the need for and costs associated with sending all OMW to treatment facilities. However, restrictions with regard to types of land eligible for spreading, maximum storage periods and the bureaucracy of the application process have rendered the agricultural use of OMW an impossibility for many olive farmers. Interviews with local stakeholdersindicate that the 2005 prohibition of application of OMW to land with slopes values above 10% has been very problematic: olive farming in Alento is practiced predominately in inland hilly areas with 82% of the study site has slope gradients over 15%. Similar dysfunctions are noted with regard to the banned category of “land with water tables situated less than 10m from zero level”, the impracticality of carrying out spreading a maximum of thirty days after pressing.

If agricultural use of OMW is not an option and OMW treatment facilities are not readily available at reasonable costs, there is a higher risk of unregulated, illegal, dumping of OMW in the study site with subsequent negative impacts on soil and water quality.