ÖGA Tagungsband 2006 1 Multifunctionality and Pluriactivity across Europe – a comparison between Scotland and Austria Holger Bergmann, Thomas Dax, Gerhard Hovorka and Kenneth J. Thomson Abstract – Multifunctionality of agriculture (MFA) has become a key issue on the European Agenda as well as in WTO talks. In this paper, we compare two dif- ferent EU NUTS3 areas (UKM41 and AT322) to evalu- ate the extent to which multiple functions of agricul- ture are linked to pluriactivity of farms and farm households. The paper presents some initial results from the FP6 project TOP-MARD and highlights one aspect of MFA which is particularly relevant for the two study areas compared. The comparison highlights structural differences and similarities of the chosen areas and gives some indication as to how pluriactiv- ity and MFA are linked. The comparison shows that the prevalence of on-farm pluriactivity is linked with extensive on-farm production and low on-farm in- comes. On the other hand, high regional economic importance of nature-based tourism is often but not always an indicator of high MFA. 1 I NTRODUCTI ON Since the start of substantial CAP reforms in the 1980s, the targets of agricultural policies and the understanding of agriculture’s role(s) have under- gone essential changes. The economic viability of many farm households has become more dependent on combinations of different forms of income, due to persistently low profitability of agricultural produc- tion especially in remote and mountainous areas. In addition, there seems to be a widely shared under- standing among rural actors and policymakers that all rural sectors have to contribute to rural develop- ment, particularly in peripheral regions, to attain appropriate household incomes and provide func- tions beyond agricultural production. Incomes from deepening and broadening activities of farm house- holds play a key role in “cushioning” primary produc- tion activities from increasing pressure from markets and policies (Kinsella et al. 2006). In most regions off-farm work contributes to a higher percentage than these activities to total farm incomes. With the foundation of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the functions and benefits of agricultural production as a whole are nowadays more comprehensively assessed within a rural framework and to a certain extent can be summarized in the term MFA. This paper presents some initial results from the FP6 EU project “Towards a Policy Model of Multifunction- ality and Rural Development“ (TOP-MARD, no. Holger Bergmann and Kenneth J. Thomson, both from the University of Aberdeen, UK; Thomas Dax and Gerhard Hovorka, both from Bundesanstalt fuer Bergbauernfragen, Vienna, Austria 501749). It focuses on two study areas marked by their peripheral locations and their difficult condi- tions for agricultural production, especially the fact that smaller agricultural holdings have to combine on-farm income with off-farm income to earn a liv- ing. The NUTS3 areas considered are “Caithness, Sutherland and Ross & Cromarty” (UKM41) 2 in the far north of Scotland, UK, and the mountainous area of Pinzgau-Pongau (AT322) in the province of Salz- burg in west Austria 3 . In both areas, the role of pluriactivity, the different strategies of agricultural households and their relation to different aspects of multifunctionality will be described in a territorial context. Furthermore, we show the relevance of the concept of multifunctionality and its impact for fur- ther developments of CAP. METHOD Multifunctionality of agriculture (MFA) is the phe- nomenon that agriculture fulfils different functions (OECD 2001). Pluriactivity describes that a farm household does realise not only agricultural (activi- ties and) income but also non-agricultural on-farm (activities) income and off-farm income. In Scotland (Quinn and Mitchell 2000) and in mountain areas of Austria (Dax and Hovorka (2004) this income- combination is of increasing importance. Several data bases like Eurostat, national agricul- tural and economic statistics and other available data –sometimes from prior research – have been used. For UKM41 most data has been delivered by SEERAD (Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department). In the case of Austria most of the data has been gathered from agricultural census data of Statistics Austria and CAP monitoring data of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management (BMLFUW) by the Bunde- sanstalt für Bergbauernfragen. RESULTS The total area of UKM41 in 2003 was 12,872 km² with a total population of ~88,000 inhabitants. The total area of AT322 in 2003 was 4,396 km² with a total population of ~163,600 inhabitants (2003). Both regions have amongst the lowest population densities in their respective countries: UKM41 with only 6.9 inhabitants per km², compared to the Scot- 2 The scottish Case study area is only Caithness and Sutherland. 3 Henceforth the both study areas will be abbreviated using the NUTS3 nomenclatura UKM41 and AT322.