Abstract
This chapter explains the reforms CAP underwent during the 1990s. The first part of the chapter is focused on the 1992 ‘MacSharry’ reform, which reduced price and production supports in the main commodity groups and introduced ‘compensatory’ payments to farmers. Particular attention is paid to the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture of 1994, which introduced a new world trade regime in agriculture. The second part of the chapter is focused on the 1999 ‘Agenda 2000’ reform, which further replaced price supports with compensatory payments. Apart from the need to accommodate further the ongoing changes in the world trade context/regime, Agenda 2000 coincided with the planned Eastern enlargement and the negotiations on the new multiyear Community budget for the period 2000–2006.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Members of the Cairns group were Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Fiji, Hungary, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Thailand and Uruguay. Hungary withdrew from the group later.
- 2.
The issue of environmental damage produced by agriculture was controversial. In 1986, the Committee for Agriculture of the European Parliament argued that, even if a connection between agriculture and environmental problems could be established, it remained unclear to what extent the Community had sufficient means available to address those problems.
- 3.
Among other things, sanctions against individual producers were not very efficient, since the authority to penalize them was in the hands of member states which were, given the fact that penalties had to be returned to the Community budget, not very motivated to carry out sanctions (Fennell 2002, 296–297).
- 4.
In an interview for Agra Europe (Daugbjerg 1997, 23), MacSharry argued that there was no other way to preserve the natural environment, traditional countryside and family-farm model of agriculture desired by society but keep farmers on land.
- 5.
The idea to buy-out price support related benefits through a bond scheme dated back to the writings of Koester (1977) and Koester and Tangermann (1977). The idea of a bond scheme was supported by the Commissioner for Competitiveness, Leon Brittain. The idea was endorsed by the Commission in its proposal of the dairy sector voluntary scheme. Due to opposition to dairy reform, the idea had little chance to see the light of day. In November 1991, the Danish Minister of Agriculture, Laurits Tørnæs, proposed a per area based bond scheme as an alternative to the Commission’s proposal. However, the idea was seen as too radical (Swinbank and Tranter 2004).
- 6.
Blair House is the name of the official guest residence of the US administration and is used for hosting foreign visits.
- 7.
In the cereals sector, a special variable levy was still allowed. However, based on the insistence of USA, it was limited to 55 % of the intervention price.
- 8.
Post-communist/socialist economies face the loss of internal and external markets.
- 9.
The PHARE programme was originally created as ‘Poland and Hungary: Assistance for Restructuring their Economies’.
- 10.
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as ‘mad cow disease’, was caused by feeding cattle with the remains of other cattle (bone meal), which lead to the spread of an infectious agent.
- 11.
Policy pillars were introduced by the TEU to differentiate between fully common policies vis-à-vis coordinated policies.
- 12.
LEADER stands for the Liaison Entre Actions de Développement de l’Économie Rurale (Links between the rural economy and development actions).
- 13.
The tendency to allocate more rural development supports in more developed regions was also present at national level. Analysis made in the case of Germany demonstrated that most of the funds were allocated to Bavaria, Hessen and Banen-Württemberg, which represent relatively more developed regional units (Buller et al. 2000, 240–242).
- 14.
Bertrand Hervieu, the architect of the French agricultural policy in that period, was a member of the Buckwell group (Lowe et al. 2002, 7).
References
Baldwin, R., and C. Wyplocz. 2006. The Economics of European Integration. 2nd ed. Maidenhead, Berkshire: McGraw Hill.
Buckwell, A., J. Haynes, S. Davidova and A. Kwiecinski. 1994. Feasibility of an Agricultural Strategy to Prepare the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe for EU Accession. Study prepared for DG-1 of the Commission, Wye, Kent.
Buckwell, A., and S. Tangermann. 1999. The Future of Direct Payments in the Context of Eastern Enlargement. Economic Policy in Transition Economies 9(3): 229–252.
Buller, H., G.A. Wilson, and A. Höll (eds.). 2000. Agri-Environmental Policy in the EU. Aldershot, Burlington: Ashgate.
Daugbjerg, C. 1997. Farmes’ Influence on East–West Integration in Europe: Policy Networks and Power. TKI Working Papers on European Integration and Regime Formation. Esbjerg: South Jutland University Press.
Daugbjerg, C., and A. Swinbank. 2004. The CAP and EU Enlargement: Prospects for an Alternative Strategy to Avoid the Lock-in of CAP Support. Journal of Common Market Studies 42(1): 99–119.
Erjavec, E. 2004. The Role of Institutions in the Negotiations for Accession to the EU. In Role of Institutions in Rural Policies and Agricultural Markets, ed. G. Van Huylenbroeck, W. Verbeke, and L. Lauwers, 61–73. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Erjavec, E., M. Rednak, and T. Volk, eds. 1997. Slovensko kmetijstvo in EU. Ljubljana: ČZD kmečki glas.
European Commission. 1991. The Development and Future of CAP, Reflections Paper of the Commission, Communication of the Commission to the Council, C0M(91) 100 Final, Brussels, 1 February 1991.
European Commission. 1995. Study on Alternative Strategies for the Development of Relations in the Field of Agriculture Between the EU and the Associated Countries with a View to Future Accession of the Countries, Agricultural Strategy Paper, COM(95) 607, Brussels, 12 December 1995.
European Commission. 1998b. Proposals for Council Regulations Concerning the Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, COM(1998) 158 Final, Brussels, 18 March 1998.
European Commission. 1999a. Directions Towards Sustainable Agriculture, Communication from the Commission to the Council; The European Parliament; The Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the regions, COM(1999) 22 Final, Brussels, 27 January 1999.
European Commission. 1999b. Europe’s Agenda 2000: Strengthening and Widening the European Union. Accessed 30 December 2008. http://www.ec.europa.eu/agenda2000/public_en.pdf
European Council. 1999. Presidency Conclusions of the Berlin European Council, 24–25 March 1999, SN 100/1/99. Accessed December 30, 2008. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/ACFB2.html
Fennell, R. 2002. The Common Agricultural Policy: Continuity and Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fouilleux, E. 2004. CAP Reforms and Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Another View on Discourse Efficiency. West European Politics 27(2): 235–255.
Fouilleux, E. 2007. The CAP. In European Union Politics, 2nd ed, ed. M. Cini, 341–355. Oxford: Oxford University press.
Garzon, I. 2006. Reforming the CAP. History of a Paradigm Change. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hart, K., and G.A. Wilson. 1998. UK Implementation of Agri-Environment Regulation 2078/92/EEC: Enthusiastic Supporter or Reluctant Participant? Landscape Research 23: 255–272.
Hendriks, G. 1994. German Agricultural Policy Objectives. In Renationalisation of the Common Agricultural Policy, ed. R. Kjeldahl and M. Tracy, 59–73. Valby: LaHutte, Institute for Agricultural Economics, Agricultural Policy Studies.
Ingersent, K. A., A. J. Rayner and R. C. Hine (eds). 1994. Agriculture in the Uruguay Round. Palgrave MacMillan.
Josling, T. 2008. External Influences on CAP Reforms: A Historical Perspective. In The Perfect Storm: The Political Economy of the Fischer Reforms of Common Agricultural Policy, ed. J.F.M. Swinnen, 57–75. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Kay, A. 1998. The Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. The Case of the MacSharry Reforms. Wallingford: CABI.
Koester, U. 1977. The Redistributional Effects of the EC Common Agricultural Policy. European Review of Agricultural Economics 4(4): 321–345.
Koester, U., and Ali El-Agraa. 2007. The Common Agricultural Policy. In The European Union. Economics and Policies, 8th ed, ed. A.M. El-Agraa, 373–410. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koester, U., and S. Tangermann. 1977. Supplementing Farm Price Policy by Direct Income Payments: Cost-Benefit-Analysis of Alternative Farm Policies with a Special Application to German Agriculture. European Review of Agricultural Economics 4(1): 7–31.
Lowe, P., H. Buller, and N. Ward. 2002. Setting the Next Agenda? British and French Approaches to the Second Pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy. Journal of Rural Studies 18: 1–17.
Lowe, P., and M. Whitby. 1997. The CAP and the European Environment. In The Common Agricultural Policy, 2nd ed, ed. C. Ritson and D.R. Harvey, 285–304. Wallingford: CAB International.
Moyer, W., and T. Josling. 2002. Agricultural Policy Reform: Politics and Process in the EU and US in the 1990s. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
Ockenden, J., and M. Franklin. 1995. European Agriculture: Making the CAP Fit the Future. London: Chatham House Papers of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Pinter Publishers.
OECD. 2001a. Multifunctionality: Towards an Analytical Framework. Paris: OECD.
OECD. 2001b. Decoupling: A Conceptual Overview. Paris: OECD.
Orden, D., D. Blandford, and T. Josling. 2009. Determinants of Farm Policies in the United States, 1996–2008, Agricultural Distortions Working Paper 81, May 2009. Washington: World Bank.
Pirzio-Biroli, C. 2008. An Inside Perspective on the Political Economy of the Fischler Reforms. In The Perfect Storm: The Political Economy of the Fischer Reforms of Common Agricultural Policy, ed. J.F.M. Swinnen, 102–114. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Potter, C., and K. Thomson. 2010. Agricultural Multifunctionality, Trade Liberalization and Europe’s New Land Debate. In EU Policy for Agriculture, Food and Rural Areas, ed. A. Oskam, G. Meester, and H. Silvis, 213–332. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Schrader, J.-V. 2000. CAP Reform, the Berlin Summit, and EU Enlargement. Intereconimics September/October: 231–242.
Swinbank, A. 1989. The CAP and the Politics of European Decision Making. Journal of Common Market Studies 2: 303–322.
Swinbank, A. 1997. The New CAP. In The Common Agricultural Policy, ed. C. Ritson and D. Harvey, 95–111. Wallingford: CAB International.
Swinbank, A., and C. Tanner. 1996. Farm Policy and Trade Conflict: The Uruguay Round and CAP Reform. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Swinbank, A., and R. Tranter (eds.). 2004. A Bond Scheme for CAP Reform. Reading: Centre for Agricultural Strategy, the University of Reading, CABI Publishing.
Swinnen, J.F.M. 1993. The Development of Agricultural Policies in Central and Eastern Europe: An Endogenous Policy Theory Perspective. Food Policy 18(3): 187–191.
Swinnen, J.F.M. 2002. Transition and Integration in Europe: Implications for Agricultural and Food Markets, Policy, and Trade Agreements. The World Economy 25(4): 481–501.
Swinnen, J.F.M. 2010. The Political Economy of Agricultural and Food Policies: Recent Contributions, New Insights, and Areas for Further Research. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 32(1): 33–58.
Tracy, M. 1993. Food and Agriculture in a Market Economy. An Introduction to Theory, Practice and Policy. La Hutte: APS.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lovec, M. (2016). Accommodating CAP to New Trade and Budget Context. In: The European Union's Common Agricultural Policy Reforms. Central and Eastern European Perspectives on International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57278-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57278-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-57277-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-57278-3
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)