Advertisement

Income Transfer Effects of the Common Agricultural Policy

  • T. E. Josling
  • Donna Hamway
Chapter
Part of the Trade Policy Research Centre book series

Abstract

The European Community’s common agricultural policy (CAP) can be considered as either a set of regulations governing the marketing of farm products in the Common Market together with some associated measures relating to the structure of the farm business, or as an inter-governmental pact which seeks to coordinate the actions of national governments taken in response to common problems. This latter view has gained ground in the 1970s as the European Community has been shaken both from without, by commodity price increases and by the oil crisis, and from within as the economies of the Community struggle to control inflation and maintain employment. But it is still an elusive concept and one which is not responsive to normal analytical methods. In this chapter, then, will be considered the more concrete manifestation of the CAP, namely the set of instruments which have been tried and tested as a means of regulating European farm markets.1 The aspect of the CAP that is to be explored is the way in which a particular set of price-support instruments distributes incomes, both within the farm sector and between farmers and their ultimate customers, the consumers.

Keywords

Common Agricultural Policy Farm Income Income Quartile World Prex Producer Benefit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 3.
    T. E. Josling and Donna Hamway, ‘Distribution of the Costs and Benefits of Farm Policy’, in Josling et al., Burdens and Benefits of Farm-Support Policies, Agricultural Trade Paper No. 1 (London: Trade Policy Research Centre, 1972) pp. 50–85.Google Scholar
  2. For a more detailed discussion of the problems of measurement of income distribution, the reader is referred to the contributions by James T. Bonnen, ‘The Distribution of Benefits from Selected US Farm Programs’, and Vernon C. McKee and Lee M. Day, ‘Measuring the Effects of US Department of Agriculture Programs on Income Distribution’, in the President’s National Advisory Commission on Rural Poverty, Rural Poverty in the United States Report (Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1968) pp. 461–505 and 506–21.Google Scholar
  3. More academic discussions can be found in Mary Jean Bowman, ‘A Graphical Analysis of Personal Income Distribution in the United States’, American Economic Review, New York, September 1956,Google Scholar
  4. James Morgan, ‘The Anatomy of Income Distribution’, Review of Economics and Statistics, Cambridge, Massachusetts, August 1962.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    For a full description of the Family Expenditure Survey, see W. F. F. Kemsley, Family Expenditure Survey: Handbook of the Sample, Fieldwork and Coding Procedures, Government Social Survey (London: HM Stationery Office, 1969).Google Scholar
  6. For a short analysis of the deficiency-payments system, compared with the import-levy system of the European Community, see Josling, Agriculture and Britain’s Trade Policy Dilemma, Thames Essay No. 2 (London: Trade Policy Research Centre, 1970).Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    See, for example, Group of European Agricultural Economists, Reform of the European Community’s Common Agricultural Policy, Wageningen Memorandum (London: Trade Policy Research Centre, 1973), reproduced in European Review of Agricultural Economics, Amsterdam, No. 1, 1973.Google Scholar
  8. a.
    A detailed description of the classification procedure used in the survey is given inFarm Classification in England and Wales 1963 (London: Ministry of Agriculture, 1964).Also see The Northern Ireland Farm Management Survey 1969–70, Studies in Farm Economics (Belfast: Northern Ireland Ministry of Agriculture, 1971)Farm Incomes in England and Wales (London: Ministry of Agriculture, various years), as well as The Changing Structure of Agriculture (London: HM Stationery Office, 1970).Google Scholar
  9. c.
    For a full description of the Family Expenditure Survey, see W. F. F. Kernsley, Family Expenditure Survey: Handbook of the Sample, Fieldwork and Coding Procedures Government Social Survey (London: HM Stationery Office, 1969).Google Scholar
  10. d.
    This follows the approach used in C. V. Brown, Impact of Tax Changes on Income Distribution Broadsheet 525 (London: Political and Economic Planning, 1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Trade Policy Research Center 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. E. Josling
  • Donna Hamway

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations