Three Decades of Policy Layering and Politically Sustainable Reform in theEuropeanUnion's Agricultural Policy

Abstract

The study of policy reform has tended to focus on single‐stage reforms taking place over a relatively short period. Recent research has drawn attention to gradual policy changes unfolding over extended periods. One strategy of gradual change is layering, in which new policy dimensions are introduced by adding new policy instruments or by redesigning existing ones to address new concerns. The limited research on single‐stage policy reforms highlights that these may not endure in the postenactment phase when circumstances change. We argue that gradual policy layering may create sustainability dynamics that can result in lasting reform trajectories. The European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has changed substantially over the last three decades in response to emerging policy concerns by adding new layers. This succession of reforms proved durable and resilient to reversal in the lead‐up to the 2013 CAP reform when institutional and political circumstances changed.

Brexit, Trade Agreements and CAP Reform

“…First, a major focus of policy remains that of supporting farm incomes. Some would argue that this is still the CAP's raison d’être , despite heightened concerns about environmental protection and enhancement, rural development and the role a multifunctional agriculture can play (Daugbjerg and Swinbank, ).…”

The Evolution of Problems Underlying the EU Agricultural Policy Regime

“…The institutional arrangement is essential to the strength and longevity of a policy regime (Jochim and May , p. 317), including in the case of CAP. Strong and durable regimes can be expected to consolidate around highly salient and fairly simple issues (Worsham and Stores , p. 172), and the institutional arrangement of the CAP has grown highly durable and is capable of accommodating internal and external pressures and shocks (Burrell , p. 272; Daugbjerg and Swinbank , p. 277). Organic farming did not emerge as a policy regime but was internalised by the CAP (Lynggaard ), and distinctively different eastern member states ‘east of the Elbe’ were not granted their own policy regime upon accession but were assimilated by the CAP with amendments (Swain ).…”

“…; Garzon ; Josling 2008a, 2008b; Petrick ; Burrell ; Oskam et al . ; Tangermann and von Cramon‐Taubadel ; Daugbjerg and Swinbank ).…”

The Changed Architecture of the EU’s Agricultural Policy Over Four Decades: Trade Policy Implications for Australia

“…When, in 1973, the EEC was enlarged with the accession of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom (UK)-the latter a major importer of agricultural products from world markets-trade diversion was inevitable, and Australia in particular found its agricultural products displaced from the UK market. The CAP's escalating budgetary costs in the 1980s led to some half-hearted attempts at reform, but it was the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations under the auspices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) that triggered a succession of 'reforms' that significantly changed the CAP's policy mechanisms, while retaining its core focus of farm income support (Daugbjerg & Swinbank 2009, 2016. The latest recalibration of the CAP, in 2013, established the policy framework for the period 2014-20.…”

“…Third, member states now have a variety of options to recouple part of the basic payment to specific production activities; known as voluntary coupled support (Daugbjerg & Swinbank 2016). Some member states have announced that they will make little use of this provision; others plan to do so to the maximum extent permitted.…”