Premium
Vorschläge zur Reform der GAP mit Blick auf Kleinbetriebe und semi‐subsistenzwirtschaftliche Betriebe
Author(s) -
Dwyer Janet
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
eurochoices
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.487
H-Index - 15
eISSN - 1746-692X
pISSN - 1478-0917
DOI - 10.1111/1746-692x.12049
Subject(s) - pillar , scope (computer science) , subsistence agriculture , business , transaction cost , common agricultural policy , european commission , scale (ratio) , rural development , rural area , commission , public economics , european union , economics , finance , agriculture , engineering , economic policy , political science , computer science , geography , cartography , structural engineering , programming language , archaeology , law
Summary Assessing the ‘new’ CAP after 2013 reveals some positive developments encouraging MA s (Managing Authorities) to recognise the particular characteristics of small and SSF s, in designing and implementing appropriate policy options. Because Pillar I aid is unavoidably linked to scale and many small farms cannot or do not claim it, the financial impact of Pillar I on small and SSF s will remain modest. Nevertheless, more options exist for increasing this impact through explicit or implicit tailoring, where Member States so choose. The Small Farmers Scheme, in particular, offers benefits by reducing transaction costs. For Pillar II , the new framework offers more scope for funding tailored to the specific needs of small and SSF farms, but there is no guarantee that this will translate into more cost‐effective Rural Development Programmes, and there is concern that such developments may be disincentivised by other aspects of the approach. Stronger guidance from the European Commission, as well as support from the European Network for Rural Development, could help Managing Authorities to consider the needs of these farms more fully in Rural Development Programme design. In sum, the ‘new’ CAP offers greater potential to support and enhance the value of Europe's small and SSF s than its predecessor. Ultimately, much depends upon choices made at national or regional levels, given the considerable range of options now available.