Developments in the Doha Round and WTO dispute settlement: some implications for EU agricultural policy

Progress in the Doha Round is assessed against the changes to the common agricultural policy (CAP) brought about by the Fischler reforms of 2003-2004, and that proposed for sugar. An elimination of export subsidies could place EU exports of processed foods at a competitive disadvantage because of high sugar and milk prices. Provided the single payment scheme falls within the green box, the likely new limits on domestic support should not be problematic for the post-Fischler CAP. However, an ambitious market access package could open up EU markets and bring pressure for further reform. If there is no Doha agreement, existing provisions will continue to apply, but without the protection of the Peace Clause; and increased litigation is likely. Further CAP reform is to be expected.

Three decades of policy layering and politically sustainable reform in the European Union’s Agricultural Policy

The study of policy reform has tended to focus on single-stage reforms taking place over a relatively short period. Recent research has drawn attention to gradual policy changes unfolding over extended periods. One strategy of gradual change is layering, in which new policy dimensions are introduced by adding new policy instruments or by redesigning existing ones to address new concerns. The limited research on single-stage policy reforms highlights that these may not endure in the postenactment phase when circumstances change. We argue that gradual policy layering may create sustainability dynamics that can result in lasting reform trajectories. The European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has changed substantially over the last three decades in response to emerging policy concerns by adding new layers. This succession of reforms proved durable and resilient to reversal in the lead-up to the 2013 CAP reform when institutional and political circumstances changed.

The CAP and EU enlargement: Prospects for an alternative strategy to avoid the lock-in of CAP support

The integration of the central and east European countries (CEECs) into the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) could become a major problem. At the Copenhagen European summit in December 2002, the EU agreed a transitional period with a gradual phasing in of direct payments. However, this strategy will not solve the problems of the CAP: budgetary limits remain problematic, the policy ignores possible developments in the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the extension of direct payments to the CEECs will further capitalize, and hence lock-in, agricultural support. The latter makes future reform even more difficult and, to overcome these problems, we suggest an alternative strategy to integrate the CEECs into the CAP. The EU should phase out direct payments by applying a bond scheme. Finally, we consider whether this option is politically viable.

Curbing agricultural exceptionalism: The EU's response to external challenge

From 1948 to 1994, the agricultural sector was afforded special treatment in the GATT. We analyse the extent to which this agricultural exceptionalism was curbed as a result of the GATT Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, discuss why it was curbed and finally explore the implication of this for EU policy making. We argue that, in particular, two major changes in GATT institutions brought about restrictions on agricultural exceptionalism. First, the Uruguay Round was a 'single undertaking' in which progress on other dossiers was contingent upon an outcome on agriculture. The EU had keenly supported this new decision rule in the GATT. Within the EU this led to the MacSharry reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 1992, paving the way for a trade agreement on agriculture within the GATT. Second, under the new quasi-judicial dispute settlement procedure, countries are expected to bring their policies into conformity with WTO rules or face retaliatory trade sanctions. This has brought about a greater willingness on the part of the EU to submit its farm policy to WTO disciplines.

The 2003 CAP Reform: Accommodating WTO Pressures

In 2003, the EU agreed a major reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP). Its centrepiece was a new Single Payment Scheme (SPS). Policy concerns at the time involved the budget, EU enlargement to the East, the WTO negotiations, and a perception (articulated by Commissioner Fischler) that there should be a shift of budget funds from CAP's Pillar 1 (price and income support) to Pillar 2 (rural development). We outline these concerns, conclude that the WTO was the main driving force of the reforms, set out the key parameters of the new support scheme, and outline some thoughts on the durability of the reformed CAP in the face of continued internal and external pressures.

Decoupling EU farm support: Does the new single payment scheme fit within the green box?

Recent reform of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has led to a further decoupling of farm support. The EU believes that the new Single Payment Scheme, which replaces the former system of area and headage payments to farmers, tied to production, will qualify for green-box status in the WTO. We examine this contention, particularly in light of the recent WTO panel report on upland cotton.

Implications for food production, land use and rural development of the European Union's Single Farm Payment: Indications from a survey of farmers' intentions in Germany, Portugal and the UK

The 2003 reform of the European Union's (EU) Common Agricultural Policy introduced a decoupled income support for farmers called the Single Farm Payment (SFP). Concerns were raised about possible future land use and production changes and their impact on rural communities. Here, such concerns are considered against the workings of the SFP in three EU Member States. Various quantitative studies that have determined the likely impact of the SFP within the EU and the study countries are reviewed. We present the results of a farm survey conducted in the study countries in which farmers' responses to a decoupling scenario similar to the SFP were sought. We found that little short-term change was proposed in the three, rather different, study countries with only 30% of the farmers stating that they would alter their mix of farm activities. Furthermore, less than 30% of all respondents in each country would idle any land under decoupling. Of those who would adopt a new activity, the most popular choices were forestry, woodland and non-food crops. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Vegetation dynamics in abandoned crop fields on a Mediterranean island: Development of succession model and estimation of disturbance thresholds

This case study on the Sifnos island, Greece, assesses the main factors controlling vegetation succession following crop abandonment and describes the vegetation dynamics of maquis and phrygana formations in relation to alternative theories of secondary succession. Field survey data were collected and analysed at community as well as species level. The results show that vegetation succession on abandoned crop fields is determined by the combined effects of grazing intensity, soil and geological characteristics and time. The analysis determines the quantitative grazing thresholds that modify the successional pathway. Light grazing leads to dominance by maquis vegetation while overgrazing leads to phryganic vegetation. The proposed model shows that vegetation succession following crop abandonment is a complex multi-factor process where the final or the stable stage of the process is not predefined but depends on the factors affecting succession. An example of the use of succession models and disturbance thresholds as a policy assessment tool is presented by evaluating the likely vegetation impacts of the recent reform of the Common Agricultural Policy on Sifnos island over a 20-30-year time horizon. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Quantifying the impact of land-use change on European farmland bird populations

The EU has adopted the European Farmland Bird Index (EFBI) as a Structural and Sustainable Development Indicator and a proxy for wider biodiversity health on farmland. Changes in the EFBI over coming years are likely to reflect how well agri-environment schemes (AES), funded under Pillar 2 (Axis 2) of the Common Agricultural Policy, have been able to offset the detrimental impacts of past agricultural changes and deliver appropriate hazard prevention or risk mitigation strategies alongside current and future agricultural change. The delivery of a stable or positive trend in the EFBI will depend on the provision of sufficient funding to appropriately designed and implemented AES. We present a trait-based framework which can be used to quantify the detrimental impact of land-use change on farmland bird populations across Europe. We use the framework to show that changes in resource availability within the cropped area of agricultural landscapes have been the key driver of current declines in farmland bird populations. We assess the relative contribution of each Member State to the level of the EFBI and explore the relationship between risk contribution and Axis 2 funding allocation. Our results suggest that agricultural changes in each Member State do not have an equal impact on the EFBI, with land-use and management change in Spain having a particularly large influence on its level, and that funding is poorly targeted with respect to biodiversity conservation needs. We also use the framework to predict the EFBI in 2020 for a number of land-use change scenarios. This approach can be used to guide both the development and implementation of targeted AES and the objective distribution of Pillar 2 funds between and within Member States. We hope that this will contribute to the cost-effective and efficient delivery of Rural Development strategy and biodiversity conservation targets.