Effects of 2013 Cap reform on land market: regionalized farm payments and changes in farmers’ intended behaviour

The CAP reform process has been a central issue for agricultural economics research in recent years, and is gaining further attention in view of the post-2013 perspectives (Viaggi et al., 2010; Bartolini et al., 2011). Today the CAP is in the middle of a new reform process. Through the debate generated by the official proposals, published in October 2011 (COM(2011)625/3), the European Union (EU) engaged in a revision of the CAP ended on 26 June 2013 when a political agreement has been reached (IP/13/613, MEMO-13-621 and IP/13/864). In particular, in Italy the switch of the payment regime from historical to regional bases will take place. The underlying assumption is that the shift to regionalized payments changes the remuneration of inputs and has an impact on farmers’ allocation of fixed resources. In this context, farmers are expected to adjust their plans to the new policy environment as the regionalization of support is meant to create a change in incentives faced by farmers. The objective of this thesis is to provide an ex-ante analysis of the potential impact of the introduction of regionalized payments, within the post-2013 CAP reform, on the land market. Regionalized payments seem to produce differentiated effects and contribute to a general (slight) increase of land exchanges. The individual reaction to the new payments introduction would be different depending on location and specialization. These effects seem to be also strongly influenced by the difference in historical payments endowment and value, i.e. by the previous historical system of distribution of payments.

The market manipulation regime in the European Union

Market manipulation is an illegal practice that enables a person can profit from practices that artificially raise or lower the prices of an instrument in the financial markets. Its prohibition is based on the 2003 Market Abuse Directive in the EU. The current market manipulation regime was broadly considered as a big success except for enforcement and supervisory inconsistencies in the Member States at the initial. A review of the market manipulation regime began at the end of 2007, which became quickly incorporated into the wider EU crisis-era reform program. A number of weaknesses of current regime have been identified, which include regulatory gaps caused by the development of trading venues and financial products, regulatory gaps concerning cross-border and cross-markets manipulation (particular commodity markets), legal uncertainty as a result of various implementation, and inefficient supervision and enforcement. On 12 June 2014, a new regulatory package of market abuse, Market Abuse Regulation and Directive on criminal sanctions for market abuse, has been adopted. And several changes will be made concerning the EU market manipulation regime. A wider scope of the regime and a new prohibition of attempted market manipulation will ensure the prevention of market manipulation at large. The AMPs will be subject to strict scrutiny of ESMA to reduce divergences in implementation. In order to enhance efficiency of supervision and enforcement, powers of national competent authorities will be strengthened, ESMA is imposed more power to settle disagreement between national regulators, and the administrative and criminal sanctioning regimes are both further harmonized. In addition, the protection of fundamental rights is stressed by the new market manipulation regime, and some measures are provided to guarantee its realization. Further, the success EU market manipulation regime could be of significant reference to China, helping China to refine its immature regime.