EU‐wide Economic and Environmental Impacts of CAP Greening with High Spatial and Farm‐type Detail

Abstract

In this paper we analyse the economic and environmental impacts of CAP greening introduced by the 2013 CAP reform using the CAPRI model. CAPRI captures the farm heterogeneity across the EU and it allows to depict the implementation of the greening measures in high detail while integrating the environmental effects and the market feedback of the simulated policy changes. The simulated results reveal that the economic impacts (land use, production, price and income) of CAP greening are rather small, although some farm types, crops (fallow land and pulses) and Member States may be affected more significantly. The CAP greening will lead simultaneously to a small increase in prices and a small decrease in production. Farm income slightly increases because the price effects offset the production decline. Similarly to economic effects, the environmental impacts (GHG emissions, N surplus, ammonia emissions, soil erosion, and biodiversity-friendly farming practices) of CAP greening are small, although some regions may see greater effects than others. In general, the environmental effects at EU level are positive on a per hectare basis, but the increase in UAA can reverse the sign for total impacts. Overall, simulated GHG and ammonia emissions decrease in the EU, while the total N

New CAP Delivery Model, Old Issues

“…Consistency between the document-based evaluation and the group evaluation confi rm the importance of formal intervention logic for actual quality of intervention. Ex ante studies of the CAP 2014-2020 argued that the reform would not bring any major changes (Gocht et al, 2016), and even indicated that intervention logic was reversed, i.e. that objectives were set to legitimise an existing intervention based on distribution logic (Erjavec et al, 2015), whereas ex post impact assessments of CAP 2014-2020 confi rm the main arguments of this research, including the positive but costly 'secondary' effects, e.g.…”

“…Member states have little experience with the programming of Pillar I. The 'greening' of the direct payment system, introduced in 2014-2020, which involved certain fl exibility and required some planning at the national level, was deemed too complicated by some member states and later largely failed in terms of the environmental objectives it aimed to pursue (Gocht et al, 2016). Eco-schemes, which will upgrade the 'greening' component in Pillar I, are more fl exible but, potentially, also more complex.…”

Green Payment and Perceived Rural Landscape Quality: A Cost-Benefit Analysis in Central Italy

“…At UE-level, Gocht et al (2017) analysed the economic and environmental impacts of CAP greening introduced by the 2013 CAP reform using the CAPRI model. Their results show that the environmental impacts of greening are small, although greater effects can be pointed out in the regions with a larger percentage of intensive farms [17].…”

“…At UE-level, Gocht et al (2017) analysed the economic and environmental impacts of CAP greening introduced by the 2013 CAP reform using the CAPRI model. Their results show that the environmental impacts of greening are small, although greater effects can be pointed out in the regions with a larger percentage of intensive farms [17]. Louhichi et al (2017), using an EU-wide individual farm level model, show that the effects of the crop diversification practice on the EU farming sector are rather small.…”

Managing the Natura 2000 network: between Europeanization and societal engagement

“…EU funding sources (and in particular the Common Agricultural Policy) are important for the management of agricultural habitats in Natura 2000 sites. Funding for agriculture already has declined for several years, whilst attempts to increase funding for environmentally-friendly agricultural management have met limited success (Gocht et al, 2017;Pe'er et al, 2017). The foreseen reallocation of budgets will further decrease the funding for agriculture (European Commission, 2018).…”