1 / 31

Decoupling and CAP Reform: Impacts and Implementation

Explore the components of the MTR Agreement in 2003 and its implications, with a focus on decoupling of direct payments and economic analysis. Discover how the intervention price cuts, modulation, cross-compliance, and more have reshaped the EU's agriculture sector post-CAP reform.

kineta
Download Presentation

Decoupling and CAP Reform: Impacts and Implementation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CAP Reform – the Luxembourg Agreement 2003 and Decoupling Lecture 9. Economics of Food Markets Alan Matthews

  2. Lecture outline • To describe the component elements of the Mid Term Review (MTR) Agreement in 2003 and how it has been implemented • To review studies on the impact of the MTR both in the EU and Ireland • To provide an economic analysis of decoupling of direct payments

  3. The MTR Agreement • June 2003 Agreement • Intervention price cuts (rice, dairy) • Decoupling • Cross-compliance • Modulation • Financial discipline • Mediterranean package April 2004 • Sugar November 2005

  4. Intervention price cuts - dairy • Dairy quotas will be maintained until the 2014/15 season. • Asymmetric price reductions for butter and SMP. The intervention price for butter will be reduced by 25% between 2004 and 2007 (10% more than agreed in Agenda 2000), for SMP, prices will be cut by 15%. • Compensation payments are provided to milk producers as part of the Single Farm Payment from 2007, but Member States may introduce it from 2005.

  5. Decoupling: rationale for Commission proposals • Simplification of payment arrangements • Encourages greater market orientation • Will reduce pressure on environment • Will improve efficiency of income transfer to farmers • Will make it easier to extend CAP to accession countries • Will make it easier to defend payments in the WTO

  6. Decoupling – the options • Full or partial decoupling • Various shares of payments can remain commodity-specific (coupled) – next slide • Time of implementation • Between 2005 and 2007 • Choice of payment schemes

  7. Partial payment options

  8. Calculation of entitlements • Historic payment scheme SFP aid per hectare = (Sum of farmer’s individual aid 2000-2002 / average of farmer’s eligible hectares 2000-2002) * payment rate for 2002 Deductions made for national reserve • Regional Aid – flat rate SFP aid per hectare = (Average Sum of aid in region 2000-02 / Average eligible hectares in region 2000-02) * payment rate

  9. Payment options in the UK • Northern Ireland – static vertical hybrid • Consists of a flat rate, area based payment topped up on historic basis for individual farmers • Scotland – historic entitlements • Top slice the payment using the National Envelope mechanism to provide specific support to beef • Wales • Adopted the historic model • England – dynamic hybrid • Moving to a flat rate system from historic entitlements over a transition period to 2012. Two regions defined with different flat rate entitlements

  10. The Single Farm Payment in Ireland • Financial ceiling applicable to each Member State – Ireland €1,322m (including dairy premium) • Where sum of entitlements exceed ceiling linear % reduction applies • 3% reduction for modulation, increasing to 5% - €5,000 threshold (85% of modulated funds remain in Ireland for Rural Development) • Up to 3% reduction for National Reserve • Entitlements can be leased with land, and sold with or without land • Stacking of entitlements allowed in some circumstances

  11. Decoupling: the effects • Output effects • By how much will output fall • What will be the knock-on effects on agro-industry and agri-services • Environmental benefits arise through more extensive production… • … but danger of land abandonment in marginal farming areas • Long term sustainability

  12. Cross compliance - requirements • Farmers receiving direct payments -SPS- must respect cross compliance • Statutory Management Requirements (Annex III) • Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (Annex IV) • Farmers - as all citizens - expected to respect legislation without support. So payments cannot be justified on multifunctionality grounds that society is paying farmers for unpriced services valued by society • The monitoring of standards: Introduction of farm audits • Mandatory for producers receiving more than €5,000 in direct payments • Financial aid for audits to be available

  13. Statutory Management Requirements (SMRs) • From 19 Community legislative acts • 5 directives on environment • Wild Birds, Groundwater,Sewage Sludge, Nitrates and Habitats • 4 Directives/Regulations on the identification and registration of animals • 7 Directives on public, animal and plant health • 3 Directives on animal welfare Directives apply as implemented by MS

  14. Modulation : budget rebalancing • Key problem is how to increase the funding of the second pillar within the constraint of a fixed overall agricultural budget • Modulation already introduced as a voluntary option in Agenda 2000 • Commission’s original 20% modulation proposal opposed: • Leads to redistribution within farming • Leads to redistribution between member states • Countries find it difficult to find the counterpart funds • Second pillar schemes have high transactions costs • Agricultural Ministers not necessarily keen on second pillar spending • Problems in finding sufficient worthwhile rural development projects

  15. Modulation decision • Distribution of funds raised through modulation • One percentage point will remain in the Member States where the money is raised • Remaining amount will be allocated among Member States according to: • criteria of agricultural area • agricultural employment • GDP per capita in purchasing power • Every Member State will receive at least 80% of its modulation funds in return

  16. Financial discipline • Direct support will be adjusted from 2007 when forecasts indicate that CAP Pillar 1 expenditure comes to within €300 million of the ceiling set out in the Financial Perspectives • Expectation that this will be needed to cover costs of Bulgarian/Romanian accession (7%) plus possible costs of any further CAP reform

  17. Impacts of decoupling • Many studies • Teagasc FAPRI-Ireland • OECD • Commission Impact studies • FAPRI-US • Dixon/Matthews (forthcoming) • We look at some results from the Dixon/Matthews study

  18. Change in volume of output as result of MTR Source: Dixon and Matthews, forthcoming

  19. Farm Incomes

  20. Change in agricultural greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalent)

  21. Growth in importance of direct payments in the CAP • Introduced in MacSharry reform, strengthened under Agenda 2000

  22. Source: US FAS Gain Report No. 34044 CAP Reform 2003

  23. Decoupled payments – conceptual overview • OECD dimensions (OECD, 2001) • Theoretical dimension – how do agricultural policies, including direct payments, potentially affect production and trade • Empirical dimension – what do we know about the actual production and trade impacts of different types of agricultural policies, including decoupled payments • Regulatory dimension - ‘best practice’ in the design of the most decoupled policies or policy practices, not least to be WTO compatible.

  24. Decoupling - definitions • Full decoupling • policy is fully decoupled if it does not influence production decisions of farmers and if it permits free determination of market prices • Importantly, both the shape and the position of the supply and demand curves should not be changed • Effective full decoupling • Where policy results in a level of production and trade equal to that which would have occurred if the policy were not in place • Example would be a coupled payment combined with a quantitative restriction equal to the old production level

  25. Although new policy (represented by S’) yields the same level of output initially, adjustment to a demand shock leads to a different output level than before Example of how the definitions differ

  26. The degree of decoupling • Comparing the degree of decoupling requires a reference, usually taken as the output effect of market price support • From producer perspective, defined as 1 minus the ratio of the production effect of the policy package over the production effect of the equivalent (in PSE terms) price increase

  27. Can decoupled payments affect production? Source: Baldwin June 2003 CAP Reform

  28. Decoupled payments in an uncertain world • Where farmers are risk averse • Wealth effects: Change in farmer’s total wealth can affect his attitude to risk • Insurance effects: If policy reduces the total risk faced by the farmer (e.g. price stabilisation scheme) it will have positive effect on output

  29. Decoupling in a dynamic world • Where there are capital market imperfections, any kind of income support – even decoupled – will be partially reinvested in agriculture • Where there are expectations of a future policy change and farmer can hope to influence this (e.g. change in base acreage for a payments scheme) decoupled scheme can affect production.

  30. Source: OECD 2005 Decoupling – Policy Implications

More Related