IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rar/journl/0188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cap Between First and Second Pillars: Looking into EU Spending on Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Fabrizio De Filippis
  • Roberto Henke

Abstract

In this paper we offer some reflections on the Cap reform process, starting from analysis of the objectives and the solidity of its two financial pillars. In the first part of the paper agricultural expenditure is re-classified on the basis of major Cap intervention typologies, showing how a process of de-specialisation and overlapping of measures between the two pillars is at work. In the second part various financial resource allocation criteria are analysed in the light of the weight attributed to different combinations of five macro-variables: direct payments, disadvantaged area allowances, agricultural area, environmental measures, sector modernisation measures. More in general, the paper sheds light on the necessity to review the two-pillar structure of the Cap and revise its objectives and tools in order to make it more sustainable and more equitable in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabrizio De Filippis & Roberto Henke, 2010. "Cap Between First and Second Pillars: Looking into EU Spending on Agriculture," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 3, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:rar:journl:0188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_Riviste.asp?IDArticolo=40174&Tipo=Articolo%20PDF&lingua=en
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sckokai, Paolo & Moschini, Giancarlo, 1993. "Interventi Disaccoppiati, Riforma della PAC e Redditi Agricoli: Una Analisi Qualitativa," ISU General Staff Papers 199309010700001193, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Alan Randall, 2002. "Valuing the outputs of multifunctional agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(3), pages 289-307, July.
    3. Rabinowicz, Ewa, 1999. "Redesigning the CAP to Meet the Challenges of EU Enlargement and the WTO: What Can Agricultural Economic Research Contribute?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(3), pages 265-281, August.
    4. Fabrizio De Filippis & Daniela Storti, 2002. "Le politiche di sviluppo rurale nell´unione europea: un secondo pilastro tutto da inventare," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0025, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    5. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Louis-Pascal Mahé, 2009. "Cap Payments after 2013 and Rural Public Goods," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 4, December.
    6. Zahrnt, Valentin, 2009. "Public Money for Public Goods: Winners and Losers from CAP Reform," ECIPE Working Papers 51300, European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE).
    7. Henke, Roberto & Sardone, Roberta, 2008. "The fortune of modulation in the process of CAP reform," 109th Seminar, November 20-21, 2008, Viterbo, Italy 44816, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    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. Roberto Henke & Maria Carmela Macrì & Daniela Storti, 2005. "Multifunctionality and Rural Development in the EU: A Comparative Analysis," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    2. Roberto Henke, 2002. "From the Mac Sharry Reform to Agenda 2000: The Cap Greening Process," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 1, May.
    3. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    4. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    5. Agnieszka Brelik, 2013. "Agro Tourism as Public Good in Rural Areas: A Case Study," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 67-74.
    6. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    7. Kleinhanss, Werner, 2011. "Impacts of the flat rates and digressive schemes on the distribution of Direct Payments in the EU," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114754, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Chun-Chu Yeh & Cheng-Shen Lin & Chin-Huang Huang, 2018. "The Total Economic Value of Sport Tourism in Belt and Road Development—An Environmental Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    9. Vanni, Francesco & Cardillo, Concetta, 2013. "The effects of CAP greening on Italian agriculture," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2013(3), September.
    10. Salvioni, Cristina & Ascione, Elisa & Henke, Roberto, 2013. "Structural and economic dynamics in diversified Italian farms," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 2(3), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Katarzyna Kosior, 2011. "Koncepcje reform Wspólnej Polityki Rolnej Unii Europejskiej po 2013 roku," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 5-6, pages 85-104.
    12. Sckokai, Paolo, 2001. "The Common Agricultural Policy In Econometric Models," Working Papers 14800, National Institute of Agricultural Economics, Italy - INEA, Osservatorio Sulle Politiche Agricole dell'UE.
    13. Niculescu Oana-Marilena, 2012. "Common Agricultural Policy Post-2013 In The View Of Romania And France," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 144-149, July.
    14. Chen Qiuzhen & Sumelius John & Arovuori Kyösti, 2009. "The evolution of policies for multifunctional agriculture and rural areas in China and Finland," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 1(4), pages 202-209, January.
    15. Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode & Clemetsen, Morten & Eik, Lars Olav & Faccioni, Georgia & Ramanzin, Maurizio & Ripoll-Bosch, Raimon & Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Sturaro, Enrico, 2019. "Exploring social preferences for ecosystem services of multifunctional agriculture across policy scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    16. Glebe, Thilo W. & Salhofer, Klaus, 2006. "Enlargement of Trade Blocs: National Welfare Effects If Trade Is Liberalized," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25529, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Helin, Janne, 2008. "Environmental protection of agriculture -clash of policies?," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6468, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Zobbe, Henrik, 2002. "On The Foundation Of Agricultural Policy Research In The United States," Staff Papers 28644, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    19. Garth Holloway & Donald Lacombe & James P. LeSage, 2007. "Spatial Econometric Issues for Bio‐Economic and Land‐Use Modelling," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 549-588, September.
    20. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Derive Individual-Specific WTP Estimates for Landscape Improvements under Agri-Environmental Schemes: Evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Irel," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12220, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community budget; Cap reform; Direct payments; Rural development; New member states; Public goods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:rar:journl:0188. 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: the person in charge The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask the person in charge to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rossiea.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.