Common statement on EU policy Based on the work on valorising biomass from hedges for energetic use the TWECOM project partners from Belgium, Germany, Netherlands and the United Kingdom jointly suggest to further develop policies on landscape on EU scale. Although landscape elements are part of current EU policies, such as CAP 2014-2020, EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 and the European Landscape Convention., there is a lack of cross-sectoral legislation and an integrated vision is absent. The fact that hedges are a multifunctional landscape feature (biodiversity, ecosystem services for agricultural production, landscape aesthetic, cultural and historic value, source for energy, integrated pest management, and economic-ecological-corridor) is not expressed appropriately in EU policies. TWECOM encourages policymakers to recognise the multiple benefits of hedgerow systems in a cross-sector policy, especially when developing a future vision on the role of biomass for a sustainable energy transition that goes hand-in-hand with ecological needs. TWECOM has developed policy guidelines to further strengthen the role of hedges as community-builders and energy-sources. TWECOM suggests to revise the role of hedges in the CAP 2014-2020. Currently it is at the discretion of each member state to include hedges as a practice to fulfil the requirements of ecological focus areas (EFAs). Because of the outstanding importance of hedges, especially for already vastly cleared and intensively used agricultural areas, we consider it necessary to include hedges as a permanent and EU wide option for EFAs. Additionally, we suggest to include further differentiations in the weighting of EFA practices regarding to hedges. Hedges that are properly managed and whose biomass is used for energy production should be given more recognition and weight than hedges that are just minimally maintained. Furthermore we encourage policy makers to revise the rules of adjacency. Using a system that allows farmers to manage hedges that are not part of their own agricultural land and add those to their own EFA would mean an incentive for the management of hedges. Furthermore biomass from landscape elements needs to be considered as a product, not as residue or waste that needs to be disposed, transported and processed according to the terms of waste. Using biomass from hedges in some kind of local product-cascade is a valuable process-tool for the promotion of hedge-products in our society. Additionally the planting of new hedges should be encouraged. Thereby we consider it necessary to start investigations and discussions about the permanence of newly planted hedges. On the one hand the consideration of hedges as a less permanent landscape element could encourage farmers to plant new hedges, because they would have the option to (re)move them if e.g. their agricultural production activities change. On the other hand, any permanent removal of hedges involves environmental impacts and the loss their other functions. Relaxing the protection of newly planted hedges (e.g. in the cross compliance regulations) is a challenge. However, hedges do not unfold their ecological potential if they are just preserved; they need to be managed actively to increase their multiple functions. However, a good management of hedges that improves ecosystems and habitats can cause problematic consequences for farmers. Based on the Birds Directive and the Habitats Directive farmers can be forced to refrain from certain agricultural production methods and to take additional protection-measures if species protected by the Birds and Habitat Directive (Red List Species) are found. Thus, farmers are not encouraged to increase the ecological value of hedges by good management measures. In fact, a measure that is taken to protect nature causes big opposition to make farmers participate on maintenance of hedges. This is another example for a lack of cross-sectoral policies and a dilemma that has to be taken into account when further developing EU policies.