Which economic model for a water-efficient Europe? Report of a CEPS Task Force. CEPS Task Force Report, 27 November 2012

This CEPS Task Force Report focuses on how to improve water efficiency in Europe, notably in public supply, households, agriculture, energy and manufacturing as well as across sectors. It presents a number of recommendations on how to make better use of economic policy instruments to sustainably manage the EU’s water resources. Published in the run-up to the European Commission’s “Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Waters”, the report contributes to the policy deliberations in two ways. First, by assessing the viability of economic policy instruments, it addresses a major shortcoming that has so far prevented the 2000 EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) from becoming fully effective in practice: the lack of appropriate, coherent and effective instruments in (some) member states. Second, as the Task Force report is the result of an interactive process involving a variety of stakeholders, it is able to point to the key differences in interpreting and applying WFD principles that have led to a lack of policy coherence across the EU and to offer some pragmatic advice on moving forward.

Defining an Institutional Framework for the Labour Market. Factor Markets Working Paper No. 24, February 2012

This paper describes a conceptual framework for the empirical analysis of farmers’ labour allocation decisions. The paper presents a brief overview of previous farm household labour allocation studies. Following this, the agricultural household model, developed by Singh, Squire and Strauss (1986), which has been frequently applied to the study of labour allocation, is described in more depth. The agricultural household model, the theoretical model to be used in this analysis, is based on the premise that farmers behave to maximise utility, which is a function of consumption and leisure. It follows that consumption is bound by a budget constraint and leisure by a time constraint. The theoretical model can then be used to explain how farmers decide to allocate their time between leisure, farm work and off-farm work within the constraints of a finite time endowment and a budget constraint. Work, both farm and off-farm, provides a return to labour which in turn relaxes the budget constraint allowing the farm household to consume more. The theoretical model can also be used to explore the impact on government policies on labour allocation. It follows that subsidies that decrease commodity prices, such as reductions in intervention prices, mean that farmers have to work more (either on or off the farm) to maintain income and consumption levels. On the other hand, income support subsidies that are not linked to output or labour, such as decoupled subsidies, are a source of non-labour income and as such allow farmers to work less while maintaining consumption levels, known as the wealth effect.

The Labour Allocation Decisions of Farm Households: Defining a theoretical model. Factor Markets Working Paper No. 31, October 2012

This paper presents a theoretical model for the analysis of decisions regarding farm household labour allocation. The agricultural household model is selected as the most appropriate theoretical framework; a model based on the assumption that households behave to maximise utility, which is a function of consumption and leisure, and is subject to time and budget constraints. The model can be used to describe the role of government subsidies in farm household labour allocation decisions; in particular the impact of decoupled subsidies on labour allocation can be examined. Decoupled subsidies are a labour-free payment and as such represent an increase in labour-free income or wealth. An increase in wealth allows farm households to work less while maintaining consumption. On the other hand, decoupled subsidies represent a decline in the return to farm labour and may lead to a substitution effect, i.e., farmers may choose to substitute non-farm work for farm work. The theoretical framework proposed in this paper allows for the examination of these two conflicting effects.

The Empirical Content of the Present Value Model: A survey of the instrumental uses of farmland prices. Factor Markets Working Document No. 53, June 2013

After reviewing the Present Value Model (PVM), in its basic form and with its major extensions, the authors carried out a literature review on the instrumental uses of farm land prices; namely what land prices may reveal in the framework of the PVM. Urban influence, non-market goods and climate change are topics where the PVM used with applied data may reveal farmers’ or landowners’ beliefs or subjective values, which are discussed in this paper. There is also extensive discussion of the topic of public regulations, and how they may affect land price directly, or through its present value.

Is the "Dubai model" a new paradigm for growth and investment strategies for oil-based economies? Case study: Eurasia. ACES Working Papers No. 8, 2008

The first part of the paper addresses the theoretical background of economic growth and competitive advantage models. Although there is a whole set of research on a relationship between foreign direct investments and economic growth, little has been said on foreign direct investments and national competitive advantage with respect to economic growth of oil and gas abundant countries of Middle East and Central Asia. The second part of our paper introduces the framework of the so-called "Dubai Model" in detail and outlines the key components necessary to develop sustainable comparative advantage for the oil-rich economies. The third part proceeds with the methodology employed to measure the success of the "Dubai Model" in the UAE and in application to other regions. The last part brings the results and investigates the degree to which other oil and gas countries in the region (i.e. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Iran) have adopted the so-called "Dubai Model". It also examines if the Dubai Model is being employed in the Eurasian (Central Asian) oil and gas regions of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The objective is to gauge if the Eurasian economies are employing the traditional growth strategies of oil-rich non-OECD countries in managing their natural resources or are they adopting the newer non-traditional model of economic growth, such as the "Dubai Model."