Suchergebnisse

Arviointitutkimus koskee Suomen talouden ytimen, valtiokonsernin talousohjauksen tilaa vuosien 1987-2008 uudistuskauden jälkeen. Mihin oli tultu vuonna 2008 ja miten talousohjausjärjestelmä toimii? Arvioinnin kohteena on myös se, miten ohjausjärjestelmän tila vastaa 2010-luvun haasteita. Arviointiaineiston muodostavat uudistuskauden dokumentit sekä ohjausjärjestelmän kaikkien tasojen eduskunnan, hallituksen, valtiovarainministeriön, ministeriöiden, virastojen ja laitosten sekä tarkastusviranomaisten haastattelut. Vastaavaa lähestymistapaa ei suomalaisessa hallinnontutkimuksessa ole aikaisemmin sovellettu. Arviointi tukeutuu kompleksisuusteoreettiseen viitekehykseen. Kompleksisuusteoriaa ei ole myöskään vastaavalla tavalla hyödynnetty. Tutkimus on siten sekä lähestymistapansa että teoriaulottuvuutensa osalta pioneerityötä, jota ei ole voitu perustaa aiempaan tutkimukseen. Sellaisena se avaa, vaatii ja osoittaa useita jatkotutkimustarpeita. Tutkimuksen päätuloksia ovat ensinnäkin se, että talousohjauksen ytimen, finanssipolitiikan ohjausrakenne on tasapainossa uudistustavoitteiden kanssa ja sellaisena se tukee talouden kokonaishallintaa. Toiseksi tutkimustulokset osoittavat, että tulosohjaustavoitteet, tuottavuus, taloudellisuus ja vaikuttavuus eivät ole toteutuneet talousarviolain edellyttämällä tavalla. Laki ja käytännön toiminta ovat kaukana tasapainosta. Lain vaatimukset ovat taakkana toimijoille. Taakka ei kuitenkaan näy suoraan menoina momenteilla ja siksi se ei ole saanut osakseen ansaitsemaansa huomiota. Kolmantena uudistustavoitteena ollut demokraattisen ohjauksen vahvistaminen näyttää valtiokonsernin osalta rakenteellisesti toteutuneen. Toimivuuden kannalta rakenne on kuitenkin vielä niin uusi, että erityisesti eduskunnan näkökulmasta sen toimivuutta on vaikea arvioida. 2010-luvun haasteiden kannalta tutkimuksessa tulee esiin joukko riskitekijöitä. Yksi niistä on talousohjauksen päätoimijan, valtiovarainministeriön ohjausrakenne. Se näyttää olevan epätasapainossa ministeriön kasvaneiden vastuiden kanssa. Taloudellisesti vaikeina aikoina valtiovarainministeriön rooli lisäksi korostuu järjestelmälogiikan mukasesti talouden tasapainottajana. Ministeriön ohjausrakenteella on yleistä merkitystä, koska se heijastuu koko hallinnon talousohjaukseen. Se voi olla sille joko tukena tai taakkana. ; In the administrative reforms of 1987-2008 in Finland the state as a whole was divided into three parts the core state, autonomous parts and actors operating in market conditions. The structural division was taken further when in 2010 the universities were split off from the financial governance of the core state to join the autonomous actors. Each part of the state body has its own financial governance. The study is confined to reforms in the system of financial governance of a state concern (core state) and the functionality of the system of governance after the reforms. This is an evaluative study assessing first the reforms in the structure and governance tools and thereafter their functionality. The structural research is based chiefly on documentary material from the era of reform. The functionality of the structures is evaluated from the perspectives of Parliament, the Government, the Ministry of Finance, the ministries, agencies and institutions and also the inspectorate. The functionality evaluation is based on 96 personal interviews with actors in charge of governance, the elite in financial governance. The object of the evaluation was the main finances under overall control and the objectives set for management by results of improving productivity, economy of operations and effectiveness. As the reforms progressed, it became a political objective to strengthen democracy or political governance in financial governance. This, too, was made a target of evaluation. The evaluation relies on the concepts of complexity theory. It was the working hypothesis of the study that through the concepts of the theory it would be possible to explain and comprehend reform processes, the functionality of the reforms and the problems experienced in them. In the study of the structure the main criterion was the complexity theory concept far from a state of equilibrium and in the study of functionality the concept of significance . No such complexity theory based study in the field of administrative science has so far been presented in Finland. Thus on the basis of the study the applicability of complexity theory to the research of reform processes and the functionality of reforms was evaluated. In the study of structure the research question was how after the reforms of 1987-2008 the governance structure of a state financial governance system is in a state of equilibrium with the goals of the reforms. The question in the study of functionality was how the financial governance system of a state concern functioned after the reforms from the perspectives of various actors. Likewise thereafter an answer was sought in the nature of triangulation to how the situation of the financial governance system structure and functionality appear to be in equilibrium with the challenges to financial governance apparent in the 2010s. Is the financial governance system a support, burden or risk to the challenges of the 2010s? In summary the answers to the research questions in light of the evaluation of the structure and functionality data are as follows: 1. The core of financial governance, the governance structure of financial policy and its functionality would appear to be almost in equilibrium with the goals of financial overall administration. In this respect the structure also supports overall financial governance. 2. The objectives of productivity, economical and efficacy in management by results would appear to be very far from being in equilibrium with respect to the requirements of the budgetary legislation (Talousarviolaki). Due to shortcomings in accounting and evaluation systems the objectives has not been achieved. Thus the management by results structure would appear to be a burden on financial governance and administration of the state economy as a whole. The structure of management by results would appear to be in a state of disintegration 3. The aim of strengthening democracy through the structural reforms of the 2000s appears to have been achieved. However, the structure is still mostly so new that its functionality, especially as regards Parliament, is difficult to evaluate. The structure appears mostly to support overall financial management, but this may entail risks from the perspective of overall financial management. 4. The situation of financial governance, from the perspective of the challenges of the 2010s would appear, as far as financial policy is concerned to be almost in equilibrium with the policy challenges, but from the perspective of overall financial management this would not appear to be the case in all respects; the situation in governance is likely to require reforms and attention to the obvious risk factors latent therein. The study permits the evaluation that complexity theory, a derivative of systems theory, would appear to be applicable to the research of reforms of complex systems and their functionality and to offer opportunities to explain and comprehend the successes and failures of reforms.

Policymakers and natural resource managers are increasingly recognizing the importance of broader geographic and gender participation in assessing climate vulnerability and developing effective adaptation policies. When such participation is limited, climate mitigation and adaptation polices may miss key opportunities to support vulnerable communities, and thus inadvertently reinforce the vulnerability of marginalized groups. This paper reports rich qualitative data from women leaders in conservation, development and climate adaptation projects to support local communities across seven Pacific Island nations. The results indicate the following priorities to support climate adaptation policies in the Pacific: (1) increased recognition for the importance of traditional knowledge; (2) greater support for local women's groups, including strategic planning and training to access climate finance mechanisms; and (3) climate policies that consider alternative metrics for women's empowerment and inclusion, formalize women's land rights, and provide land for climate refugees. Existing evidence is discussed which supports the importance of these priorities in the Pacific. Their input identifies research gaps in climate adaptation and provides important guidance for governments, non-governmental organizations, and development agencies leading climate adaptation efforts.

Marxismin mukaan kapitalistisen yhteiskunnan jäsenet jakaantuvat kolmeen luokkaan: porvaristoon, keskiluokkaan ja työväenluokkaan. Jotkut marxismin tukijat jakavat keskiluokan talonpojistoon ja muuhun keskiluokkaan. Talonpojisto on vähenevä luokka. Koska marxismin luokkateorian mukaan poliittiset puolueet vaalivat yhteiskuntaluokien intressejä, tutkin pitääkö tämä väite paikkansa. Ensin selvitin marxilaisen teorian luokista ja niiden intresseistä eli eduista, joiden puolustamiseski luokat järjestäytyvät poliittisiksi puolueiksi. Ne laativat itselleen yhteiskuntapoliittiset ohjelmansa, joita ne pyrkivät politiikansa avulla toteuttamaan. Tutkimusaineistona käytän Suomen eduskunnassa tutkimusvuosina edustettina olelleiden puolueiden tavoite- ja yleisohjelmia, joista selvitän sisällön analyysiä käyttäen niiden sisällön ja julkilausutut tavoitteet. Erityisesti pyrin selvittämään orientoituvatko puolueet ohjelmissaan tiettyjen luokkien etujen puolustajiksi vai missä määrin ne esiintyvät yhteiskunnan yleisten etujen vaalijoina. Tutkimus tapahtuu toisaalta puolueiden eduskuntoimintaa selvittämällä. Tällöin pyrin saamaan selville sen toimivatko puolueet periaate- ja tavoiteohjelmiensa mukaisesti laatiessaan lakialoitteita eduskunnassa. Kolmantena tutkimuskohteena on hallituksen esitysten sisällön eritteleminen intressiorientaation pojalta. Kysymys kuuluu palvelevatko hallituksen esitykset yleistä vai luokkien erityisetuja. Tutkimuksessa selvisi, että puolueet niin ohjelmalausumissaan kuin eduskuntatoiminnassaan vaalivat sekä yleistä etu, josta käytän nimitystä luokkien yhteisetu, että luokkien erityisetuja. Eniten puolueet vaalivat yhteisetua. Erityiseduista puolueet vaalivat kukin tiettyä luokkaetua enemmän kuin toista. Tämän perusteella puolueet jakaantuvat ensijaisesti porvariston, keskiluokan ja työväenluokanetuja vaaliviksi. Hallituksen esityksissä luokkaorientaatio on heikompaa kuin kansanedustajien lakialoitteissa. Tutkimustuloksistani selviää myös se, että vaikka puolueet ovat viime vuosikymmeninä ottaneet vaaliakseen aikaisempaa enemmän kaikkien luokkien intressejä ja niiden yleispuolueominaisuudet ovat lisääntyneet, tietty luokkaorientaatio on säilynyt. ; Classes continually alter and influence party strategies and also the behaviour of voters. The members of classes form economic, professional and political organisations. Every class aims to exert the greatest influence upon the state with the help of its political party. This study researches the class basis of political competition, the effect of class interests on the policies of nine Finnish parties in their political programmes and initiative work in the Parliament. The investigation is based on historical materialism and its class structure theory developed by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and other Marxists. The aim of study is to estimate how appropriate the class schema of historical materialism is for analysing the political partisanships and ideological conflicts in advanced industrial society. The statements and aims of political party programmes are put into practice in Parliament. This research analyses how parties represent their aims in their political programmes and what their parliamentarians do in Parliament. Is a party the representative of one class or does it equally promote the interests of many classes? Is it a class party or a generally oriented party? As in historical materialism, the programmes and legislative initiatives have been classified into five groups. The first group contains general class interest, oriented towards the common good. The next four groups comprise bills with a specific class interest orientation: bourgeoisie, the middle class, farmers and workers. The parties investigated are The National Coalition Party /The Conservative Party, The Swedish People`s Party, The Finnish Centre Party, The Finnish Social Democratic Party, The Left Alliance, The Liberals, The True Finns, The Christian Democratic Party and The Greens. The changes in politics and in party relationships over thirty years are investigated by comparing the parliamentary actions of parties from the 1960´s to the 1990´s. The study concerns the legislative initiatives of the years 1965, 1972, 1988 and 1999. The data on the programmes were collected from the two political programmes of nine parties from the years 1950 2003. The programmes of political parties are the public flag of the party as Engels expressed it, although their programmes have lost some of their class orientation. In the programmes of all nine political parties the contents aiming at the common good are the first, most important aim, the percentages being 76 98 %. Differences in the programmes of the political parties can still be found. The political parties emphasise their interests and aims in their own ways. The Conservative Party, The Swedish People´s Party and The Liberals have the next important interest in the bourgeoisie. The Swedish People´s Party, The Finnish Centre Party and The True Finns emphasise the middle class and the farmers. The Finnish Social Democratic Party, The Left Alliance and The Greens take care of working class. The main task of Parliament is to enact legislation. Bills can be submitted to Parliament by the Government or as private members bills. In this process the class interests notably emerge in private members bills of plenary sessions. The main Finnish political parties took into consideration the interests of all classes. All nine parties have made in the largest extent common good legislative initiatives. For all nine parties, the most prevalent type of legislative initiatives was those for the common good (84 -67 %). At the same time they tended to favour special class interests. The least specific class parties were The Christian Democratic Party, The Green Party and The Swedish People´s Party. Among special class interests all the parties oriented more to middle class interests in Parliament than in their declared objectives (18.8 7.0 %). The Liberals, The Conservative Party, The Social Democratic Party, The Left Alliance and The True Finns had the strongest middle class orientation. The Conservative Party were the most bourgeois party (10.2%). The strongest working class interest was found in The Left Alliance, The Social Democratic Party and The Green Party (18.8 13.1 %). The Finnish Centre Party and The Social Democratic party, The Left Alliance and The True Finns were closest to working class interests. Are there class oriented differences in the contents of the legislative initiatives and political programmes of the nine political parties? The contents were classified into eleven groups: administration, civil rights, nature conservation, economics, occupation structure, social policy, public health, education, culture, labour market and international affairs. All nine parties have the same three most important contents of legislative initiatives. These were finance/economics, social policy and administration systems. And all nine parties were more interested in financial and economic aims than their political manifestos suggest. The fourth important content for The Conservative Party, The Swedish People`s Party, The Liberals and The Christian Democratic Party was education. Employment was the fourth aim of The Finnish Centre Party and The True Finns. The Labour Market was also important to The Finnish Social Democratic Party, The Left Alliance and The Greens. Nature conservation was important to The Greens, too. The contents of government bills are more oriented towards the common good than are the private members bills. The conclusion is that the main Finnish political parties took the interests of all classes into consideration. At the same time they reveal preferences for special class interests. This emerges in political manifestos and legislative initiatives and government proposals. The Finnish political parties are not purely general parties devoid of class background. Finance and economics was the basis upon which the people arranged their lives and formed political opinions. The class structure of historical materialism is suitable to demonstrate political partisanship in Finland during the second half of the twentieth century. Social changes affect both the class structures and the political aims of parties and give rise to social and ideological conflicts in advanced industrial societies. The consensus policy is one appearance of civilized class struggle.

In this report we aim to analyse the economic and environmental impacts of Pillar I direct payments, and to demonstrate alternative instruments that are better suited to achieve CAP objectives. The instruments—a targeted payment to land at risk of abandonment and a tax on mineral fertilisers—were selected on the basis of the Polluter Pays and Provider Gets Principles. We do this using two state‐of‐the‐art agricultural economic simulation models. The first model, CAPRI, is used to quantify the large‐scale or aggregate impacts for individual countries, the EU and the world. The other model, AgriPoliS, is used to quantify the fine‐scale or farm and field level impacts in a selection of contrasting agricultural regions, to consider the potential influence of the large spatial variability in agricultural and environmental conditions across the EU. The results show that direct payments are keeping more farms in the sector and more land in agricultural use than would otherwise be the case, and thus avoiding land abandonment, principally in marginal regions. Particularly the area of grassland is substantially higher, because it is generally less productive than arable land and hence more dependent on direct payments for keeping it in agricultural use. The magnitudes of the impacts of direct payments on land use therefore vary strongly across regions due to spatial variability in productivity: marginal regions with large areas of less productive land are heavily influenced by direct payments, while regions with large areas of relatively productive land are hardly affected, because this land would be farmed in any case. By keeping more farmers in the sector longer, direct payments are slowing structural change, which can hamper agricultural development. However the potential benefits of faster structural change vary considerably among our study regions. In relatively productive regions direct payments are hindering development, because too many farmers are staying in the sector and preventing the consolidation of land in larger farms, which would improve their competitiveness and increase farm profits. On the contrary, the mass departure of farms that is currently avoided, will not lead to the same general benefits in marginal regions. Instead of freed land being absorbed by remaining farms, large areas of relatively unproductive land are abandoned without payments. This land is unprofitable to maintain in agricultural land use, even if integrated into larger farms, because current market prices are too low to motivate farming it. Consequently direct payments pose a serious goal conflict: the avoidance of land abandonment on the one hand, which can have negative impacts on public goods, and restricting agricultural development on the other hand. Once again this goal conflict is rooted in the spatial variability of agricultural conditions in the EU. Maintaining extensively managed farmland, particularly semi‐natural pastures, is central for conservation of biodiversity and preservation of the cultural landscape. Therefore direct payments are contributing to the provisioning of these public goods, but principally in marginal areas. Further, abandonment of land can reduce its agricultural productivity due to erosion or afforestation. Thus, direct payments are contributing to food security by preserving the productive potential of land for the future, but only marginal land since relatively productive land is farmed in any case. Production of agricultural commodities is affected to a lesser degree by direct payments than land use per se. Nevertheless, food exports from the EU are higher and imports lower as a consequence of direct payments. However, the additional supply generated by direct payments also lowers output prices, which reduces the profitability of commodity production; thereby partially offsetting the additional revenues from direct payments. The higher agricultural output brought about by direct payments causes higher levels of environmentally damaging greenhouse‐gas emissions, nutrient surpluses and pesticide use. The higher greenhouse‐gas emissions for the EU are, to some extent, moderated by lower emissions in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, the net effect of direct payments is higher global emissions of greenhouse gases. The environmental impacts of higher nutrient surpluses and pesticide inputs are less conclusive, since these depend also on spatial factors, i.e., where the emissions occur. Although EU‐scale and regional emissions are higher due to direct payments, agricultural production is less intensive generally, on account of the lower output prices. Analysing the net effects of these two opposing forces requires additional biophysical modelling at relevant spatial scales, such as watersheds or landscapes, which is beyond the scope of this study. Pillar I direct payments generate a significant transfer of income to farmers and land owners who are not necessarily farmers; 40 billion euro annually. Of this transfer a substantial proportion goes to farmers in relatively productive regions and, further, to a minority of farmers that need them least. In relatively productive regions payments are not needed for continued agricultural production and preservation of farmland, but instead rather fuel higher land and rental prices, which hampers structural change. On the contrary, the need for support is greatest in marginal regions, because some form of payment to marginal land is needed to avoid its abandonment and the loss of associated public goods. Finally, the direct payments even come at the cost of lower market returns for farmers due to slower structural change (smaller and less competitive farms) and lower output prices (due to greater EU output). On the other hand the lower output prices lead to somewhat lower food prices, but at the greater cost of financing the direct payments. Our main conclusion is that Pillar I direct payments are generating serious goal conflicts due to spatial variability in conditions across the EU. On the one hand these payments are contributing to the provisioning of public goods by preserving marginal agricultural land. On the other hand they are hampering agricultural development, primarily in relatively productive regions. Payments to relatively productive land that would be farmed any way not only inflate land values (capitalisation) but also slow structural change, which are both likely to hinder agricultural development and hence the competitiveness of the EU on the global market. The direct payments also increase environmental pressure; by subsidising land use generally and the associated production, they are incapable of controlling environmentally damaging emissions, which is also in conflict with broad CAP objectives. The goal conflict arises because direct payments are universal, a payment principal that does not consider spatial variability in the EU and the associated trade‐offs in regard to development and environmental effectiveness. Our analysis considered two alternative policy instruments that have the potential to curb the identified goal conflicts associated with direct payments, by applying the Polluter Pays and Provider (of public goods) Gets Principles at appropriate spatial scales. Replacing direct payments with a payment targeted on marginal land (and associated public goods) prevents land abandonment at a lower cost, by avoiding payments to relatively productive land that is farmed in any case. This also allows surviving farms in regions with relatively productive land to compensate for lost direct payments through expansion and associated scale economies, as well as higher output prices. This instrument therefore finances the provisioning of public goods without adverse effects on development and the efficiency of agricultural production. The EU‐wide tax on mineral fertiliser demonstrates that this instrument has the potential to reduce nutrient surpluses. Since direct payments cause higher levels of polluting emissions, policy instruments targeting emissions at relevant spatial scales are needed to achieve cost‐effective abatement. Overall we find that Pillar I direct payments are not addressing the diversity of challenges facing European agriculture. In fact our quantitative analysis indicates that the potential for the current system to meet these challenges is seriously impaired by goal conflicts and spatial variability across the EU. A better policy requires that instruments are targeted on desired outcomes and designed according to sound principles, specifically the Polluter Pays and Provider Gets Principles. These principles would ensure that farmers are provided with appropriate incentives to i) generate public goods that otherwise would be underprovided; ii) mitigate environmentally damaging emissions at the lowest possible cost to society; and iii) continually strive to improve environmental performance. Such instruments are also fairer and promote a more competitive or viable agricultural sector by not obstructing structural change and hence agricultural development.