Cet article porte sur l’évolution récente (depuis 2000) de la localisation des productions animales (lait de vache, viande bovine, porcs et volailles) au sein des Etats membres de l’Union Européenne. En utilisant les dernières données statistiques disponibles à un niveau géographique fin, une analyse est conduite sur les processus de concentration géographique et de spécialisation productive des territoires. Les forces qui influent sur ces processus ne sont pas nouvelles et ont déjà fait l’objet de nombreux travaux d’économistes au fil du temps. Elles concernent principalement les avantages comparatifs, les économies d’échelle et d’agglomération ainsi que la qualité de la structuration industrielle et commerciale. Si les normes environnementales (directive Nitrates, Natura 2000…) et les mesures du développement rural (soutiens spécifiques aux agricultures des zones défavorisées) constituent un levier pour freiner voire diminuer la concentration animale, force est de constater que leur influence est souvent moins grande que les forces évoquées ci-dessus. La spécialisation productive des territoires demeure cependant un processus complexe. Une analyse de la co-localisation des productions animales met en évidence le fait que les productions de granivores (volailles et porcs) ont tendance à se localiser dans les zones géographiques similaires. Cependant, l’association porcs et vaches laitières est la plus fréquente dans les zones les plus denses en cheptel total. Le cheptel de vaches allaitantes a quant à lui tendance à être repoussé dans les zones défavorisées où les autres productions animales ont des difficultés à s’implanter ou à se maintenir.

How consistent is a single farm payment system with rural development goals? A new economic geography model is used to compare coupled subsidies to 'single farm payments' effects on the location of farming, agro-industry and non-farm activity between rural and urban areas. This abstract model features a majority of employment in service sectors, farming vertically linked to manufacturing, and strong preferences for geo-varieties. It appears that both coupled subsidies and single farm payments can decrease spatial agglomeration. But only the single farm payment policy raises welfare in both rural and urban regions of this stylised economy. Copyright (c) 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation (c) 2009 The Agricultural Economics Society.

The aim of this paper is to gain an understanding into how agricultural policies have affected structural change in the French dairy sector. A nonstationary Markov model is estimated using a Generalized Cross Entropy approach. Results show that while the price of cow's milk encourages farm growth, direct payments and quota restriction favor small farms. The price signal is a key factor of structural change. As a result, higher milk prices may accelerate the trend toward the further growth of dairy farms. Settlement policy and technical change seem not to slow this trend.

Abstract:Integrating natural resources and ecological services in the production process is crucial to implement sustainable agriculture. However, the measurement of natural resource efficiency remains difficult. This paper aims at contributing to this issue, by investigating French farms' use and excess (slack) of energy resources through Data Envelopment Analyses (DEA). Results show that disentangling energy resources from the rest of intermediate consumption highlights energy use excess which is masked when considering intermediate consumption as a whole. The analysis of the determinants of energy use excess and of intermediate consumption shows a discrepancy in results, which policy-makers should take into account when designing energy policies. In addition, results show that large and highly capital intensive farms perform better in terms of energy use excess, while the dependence on public subsidies is a constraint.

This paper evaluates the impact of increasing imports on the reallocation of agrifood production across regions within countries. From French data for the period 1995–2002, we show that regional agrifood production adjusts differently to increasing imports according to the region where the agrifood firms are located. Even though proximity to consumers is important, an increase in agrifood imports does not increase agrifood production with a high demand but makes low‐wage regions more attractive. In addition, an increase in imports of agricultural products processed by agrifood firms leads to the reallocation of agrifood production away from regions with good agricultural access and toward those with limited access to agricultural products.