1 / 13

Changes to CAP and Regional Interests: An Analysis

This study examines the potential changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and their impact on regional interests. It evaluates the economic dependency of CPMR regions on the First Pillar, the breakdown of farm support, and explores the need for equalization systems. The study also discusses the formation of regional interest groups and their implications for the CPMR.

sharonlopez
Download Presentation

Changes to CAP and Regional Interests: An Analysis

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. The Regions and Changes to the CAPElements of Analysis and Discussion Concerning the First PillarStudy by Marie Imbs –CPMR trainee CPMR GENERAL ASSEMBLY Florence - 18/10/2007

  2. Context • Changes to the CAP are subject to external and internal influences: - International negotiations at the WTO - Internal issues (2008 Health Check, review of the European budget for 2008-2009, end of the financial perspectives in 2013) • Adoption of CPMR position concerning the First Pillar

  3. Issue • Evaluation of the thrust of changes to the First Pillar that are most likely to meet regional interests i) How exposed are the regions to possible changes to the First Pillar? ii) Can the regions forge a joint position concerning changes to the First Pillar?

  4. Breakdown of farm support for CPMR regions The breakdown of support is dependent on economic factors and production preferences

  5. Breakdown of farm support for CPMR regions • North/South divide • Disparities between regions from different member states • Disparities between regions within member states

  6. The CPMR regions’ economic dependency on the First Pillar A. The importance of the First Pillar when it comes to preserving farming activities varies in different regions • North/South divide • Regions with the lowest levels of economic sustainability: the former East German Länder, the British, Finnish and Swedish regions, the North/West quarter of France, Limousin

  7. A. The importance of the First Pillar when it comes to preserving farming activities varies in different regions The CPMR regions’ economic dependency on the First Pillar • Farms in the North will have little economic viability if heavy cuts are made to the First Pillar • Consequences in terms of income and thus preservation of farming activities

  8. Breakdown of farm support for CPMR regions • The differing levels of support reflect the diversity of regional farming situations • The CAP does not contribute to territorial cohesion Are any equalisation systems needed?

  9. Breakdown of farm support for CPMR regions • Equalisation systems : • Mutualisation of support through the introduction of support at regional level: benefits extensive farms that have little access to direct support to the detriment of intensive farms favoured by the CAP within given regions • Mutualisation of support through the creation of support at national level: promotes interregional cohesion. Big redistributive effect in member states where the breakdown of support per hectare varies widely (Germany, France, Italy and Spain)

  10. Interest groups established in accordance with the regions’ degree of economic viability if funding support is reduced (internal issue) and MPS (WTO issue) The CPMR regions’ economic dependency on the First Pillar B. Implications for the CPMR: formation of regional interest groups regarding support coming from the First Pillar

  11. CONCLUSIONS for the CRPM • Diverse regional interests, but common approach to ensure greater inter- and intra-regional cohesion • Should the Second Pillar (which complements the First) be strengthened by coupling support with the production of public goods, for example? The role of the regions in determining potential environmental services

  12. The Regions and Changes to the CAPElements of Analysis and Discussion Concerning the First Pillar CPMR GENERAL ASSEMBLY Florence - 18/10/2007

More Related