There were large regional differences between the German federal states. While in Saarland an average rental price of €99 was estimated, the rental and lease prices in the agricultural areas bordering the Netherlands were considerably higher. In North Rhine-Westphalia, an average of €560 was due. In Lower Saxony (€548), Schleswig-Holstein (€479), and Bavaria (€415), the rental prices were also significantly above the national average.
Of the total 16.6 million hectares of agricultural land in Germany, approximately 60 percent consists of leased land; 38 percent is owned by farmers. The majority of leased areas consist of arable land (69 percent), followed by permanent grassland (27 percent) and other leased areas (4 percent). The latter include areas with vineyards and orchards, or nurseries and greenhouses.
There are also significant differences in legal forms among different agricultural enterprises. Last year, about 85 percent in Germany were sole proprietorships, of which more than half were part-time farms. A minority (12 percent) were partnerships and companies as well as legal entities, including joint-stock companies and GmbHs. But those cooperatives manage an average of 176 hectares per business, significantly larger than individual farms with 46 hectares.
Their market position relative to smaller businesses is also strong: large business forms collectively manage about 39 percent of agricultural land in Germany.
There are various reasons why rental prices are rising: among them, agricultural land in general is becoming scarcer, but also technological advances and the centralization of businesses. This leads to more competition. For example, livestock farms require more space to house more animals.
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has criticized this. “Land has become an object of speculation,” says Rolf Sommer, head of agriculture and land use at WWF Germany. German agriculture needs diversity, but according to WWF, European agricultural policy is moving in the wrong direction. Across the entire EU, 80 percent of direct payments from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) go to only 20 percent of businesses.
In the future, hectare subsidies should be abolished, and funding should be provided for socially relevant services such as biodiversity conservation, groundwater and climate protection, or animal welfare.