CAP Reform vs WTO: Crop Diversification or Crop Rotation? : Legal opinion prepared by Dr. Christian Häberli at the request of APRODEV, the Association of World Council of Churches related Development Organisations in Europe

The European Commission’s proposals for the Legislative Framework of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in the period 2014-2020 include, inter alia, the introduction of a “strong greening component”. For the first time, all EU farmers in receipt of support are to “go beyond the requirements of cross compliance and deliver environmental and climate benefits as part of their everyday activities crop diversification as a contribution to all EU farmers in receipt of support go beyond the requirements of cross compliance and deliver environmental and climate benefits as part of their everyday activities.” In a legal opinion prepared at the request of APRODEV, the Association of World Council of Churches related Development Organisations in Europe (www.aprodev.eu), Christian Häberli examines the WTO implications of this proposal, as compared with an alternative proposal to rather link direct payments to crop rotation. The conclusions are twofold: 1. Crop rotation is at least as likely to be found Green Box-compatible as crop diversification. Moreover, it will be more difficult to argue that crop diversification is “not more than minimally production-distorting” because it entails for most farmers less cost and work. 2. Even if (either of the two cropping schemes) were to be found “amber”, the EU would not have to relinquish this conditionality. This is because the direct payments involved would in all likelihood not, together with the other price support instruments, exceed the amount available under the presently scheduled maximum.

Die Black Box der Studierenden: Studienmotivation und -verhalten vor und nach der Bologna-Reform

Die Universitäten in Deutschland und der Schweiz haben in den letzten zehn Jahren eine Reihe von Reformen und Veränderungen erlebt. Insbesondere die Bologna-Reform, aber auch die gestiegenen Studierendenzahlen werden dabei mit einer Reihe von nachteiligen Konsequenzen in Verbindung gebracht. In diesem Beitrag untersuchen wir die Frage, inwiefern sich die auf das Studium bezogenen Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen der Studierenden nach der Bologna-Reform verändert haben. Unsere Datenbasis sind zwei umfangreiche Befragungen, die 2001 und 2012 an der Universität Bern durchgeführt wurden. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass sich die soziodemographische Zusammensetzung der Studierenden zwar deutlich verändert hat. Der zeitliche Aufwand für das Studium, die Leistungsmotivation der Studierenden, die Erwerbspartizipation oder der berichtete Zeitdruck haben aber in den letzten zehn Jahren wider Erwarten keine wesentlichen Veränderungen erfahren. Allerdings verfolgen heute mehr Studierende das Ziel, eine gute soziale Position und ein höheres Einkommen zu erreichen. Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Ergebnisse erscheint eine Reform der Reform nicht zwingend erforderlich zu sein.

"Let's Talk Cash": Cantons' Interests and the Reform of Swiss Federalism

In 2004 the Swiss people accepted a new equalization scheme and a new distribution of competences between the federal state and the cantons. It was argued that the reform was successful because of the capacity of veto-players to overcome their interests and adopt a ‘problem-solving’ interaction mode. We propose a different interpretation and argue that distributive issues and the accommodation of actors' interests crucially mattered. We identify three mechanisms that contribute to a successful reform, i.e. package-deals, side-payments and the downsizing of the reform. Our in-depth, mainly qualitative study of both the content of the reform and related decision-making process supports the pertinence of these strategies for the explanation of the successful reform of Swiss federalism.

EU agricultural reform fails on biodiversity

In December 2013, the European Union (EU) enacted the reformed Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for 2014–2020, allocating almost 40% of the EU's budget and influencing management of half of its terrestrial area. Many EU politicians are announcing the new CAP as “greener,” but the new environmental prescriptions are so diluted that they are unlikely to benefit biodiversity. Individual Member States (MSs), however, can still use flexibility granted by the new CAP to design national plans to protect farmland habitats and species and to ensure long-term provision of ecosystem services