IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/iag/reviea/v18y2021i1p31-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Supported Robustness and Adaptation: Implications for the Resilience of Grain Farming in Bulgaria

Author

Listed:
  • Stela VALCHOVSKA

    (University of National and World Economy, Bulgaria)

  • Mariya PENEVA

    (University of National and World Economy, Bulgaria)

Abstract

Agricultural policy attracts research interest in terms of forecasts and results. However, it can also be useful to analyse the institutionally designed policy goals and instruments in view of their application in practice. This research investigates whether the agricultural policy in Bulgaria, as implemented within the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union, contributes towards the robustness and / or adaptation of grain farms to current and future challenges. Policy documents from the 2014–2020 program period have been examined through the Resilience Assessment Tool (ResAT). The analysis showed that the currently implemented agricultural policy provides relatively strong support to the robustness of the grain farming sector. It facilitates the perseverance of these farms both in the short and long run. However, available policy support aimed at enhancing adaptation and change in response to challenges is less relevant to grain farmers. Nevertheless, it does not have negative impact on their resilience.

Suggested Citation

  • Stela VALCHOVSKA & Mariya PENEVA, 2021. "Policy Supported Robustness and Adaptation: Implications for the Resilience of Grain Farming in Bulgaria," Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Institute of Agricultural Economics, vol. 18(1), pages 31-46.
    • Handle: RePEc:iag:reviea:v:18:y:2021:i:1:p:31-46
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eadr.ro/RePEc/iag/iag_pdf/AERD2101_31-46.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    2. Catrien J.A.M. Termeer & Art Dewulf & G. Robbert Biesbroek, 2017. "Transformational change: governance interventions for climate change adaptation from a continuous change perspective," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(4), pages 558-576, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    2. Simon Baumgartinger-Seiringer & Balazs Pager & Michaela Trippl, 2024. "Regions in industrial transitions: exploring the uneven geographies of vulnerability, preparedness and responsiveness," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2024(03), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    3. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.
    4. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    5. Hellsmark, Hans & Hansen, Teis, 2020. "A new dawn for (oil) incumbents within the bioeconomy? Trade-offs and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Barbanente, Angela & Grassini, Laura, 2022. "Fostering transitions in landscape policies: A multi-level perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    7. Sander Jacobs & Fernando Santos-Martín & Eeva Primmer & Fanny Boeraeve & Alejandra Morán-Ordóñez & Vânia Proença & Martin Schlaepfer & Lluis Brotons & Robert Dunford & Sandra Lavorel & Antoine Guisan , 2022. "Transformative Change Needs Direction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-9, November.
    8. Rik B Braams & Joeri H Wesseling & Albert J Meijer & Marko P Hekkert, 2022. "Understanding why civil servants are reluctant to carry out transition tasks [“Legitimation” and “development of positive Externalities”: Two Key Processes in the Formation Phase of Technological I," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 905-914.
    9. Mäkitie, Tuukka & Normann, Håkon E. & Thune, Taran M. & Sraml Gonzalez, Jakoba, 2019. "The green flings: Norwegian oil and gas industry’s engagement in offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 269-279.
    10. Ryschawy, Julie & Tiffany, Sara & Gaudin, Amélie & Niles, Meredith T. & Garrett, Rachael D., 2021. "Moving niche agroecological initiatives to the mainstream: A case-study of sheep-vineyard integration in California," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Xu, Lei & Su, Jun, 2016. "From government to market and from producer to consumer: Transition of policy mix towards clean mobility in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 328-340.
    12. Sampsa Hyysalo & Jani Lukkarinen & Paula Kivimaa & Raimo Lovio & Armi Temmes & Mikael Hildén & Tatu Marttila & Karoliina Auvinen & Sofi Perikangas & Allu Pyhälammi & Janne Peljo & Kaisa Savolainen & L, 2019. "Developing Policy Pathways: Redesigning Transition Arenas for Mid-range Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, January.
    13. Karoliina Isoaho & Jochen Markard, 2020. "The Politics of Technology Decline: Discursive Struggles over Coal Phase‐Out in the UK," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(3), pages 342-368, May.
    14. Christoph Friedrich & Daniel Feser, 2024. "Combining knowledge bases for small wins in peripheral regions. An analysis of the role of innovation intermediaries in sustainability transitions," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 44(2), pages 211-236, June.
    15. Laura Virta & Riikka Räisänen, 2021. "Three Futures Scenarios of Policy Instruments for Sustainable Textile Production and Consumption as Portrayed in the Finnish News Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    16. Iizuka, Michiko & Hane, Gerald, 2021. "Transformation towards sustainable development goals: Role of innovation ecosystems for inclusive, disruptive advances in five Asian case studies," MERIT Working Papers 2021-001, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    17. Chunhong Sheng & Yun Cao & Bing Xue, 2018. "Residential Energy Sustainability in China and Germany: The Impact of National Energy Policy System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    20. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    grain farmers; farm sustainability; policy support; Resilience Assessment Tool (ResAT).;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iag:reviea:v:18:y:2021:i:1:p:31-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Corina Saman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaacaro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.