Suchergebnisse

peer-reviewed ; Paper prepared for presentation at the 172nd EAAE Seminar 'Agricultural policy for the environment or environmental policy for agriculture?' May 28-29, 2019. Brussels. ; Abstract As part of its international obligations, Ireland faces emission reduction targets with respect to greenhouse gases (GHG). These reduction targets are to be achieved both in the short term and over the coming decades. Agriculture is a substantial source (33%) of Ireland's GHG emissions. Whereas the economic welfare of farmers has been the dominant force in shaping agriculture policy for several decades, there has been a notable increase in environmental concerns and a gradual emergence of environmental policies which are relevant to agriculture, particularly in the last 10 years. The future evolution of the agri-food sector in Ireland must therefore be seen in the context of both the economic growth objectives of national agricultural policy, as well as national environmental policy objectives arising from international obligations. In light of the recent proposals with respect to the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2020 (EC, 2018), environmental objectives will become an increasingly important subset of the CAP objectives and the implementation of the CAP in Ireland. The EU Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) requires that Ireland reduce its non-ETS GHG emission by 20% by 2020 relative to the 2005 level. The reduction target for the non-ETS sector for 2030 is 30%, but incorporates so called flexibility mechanisms designed to make the achievement of this target less onerous. A partial equilibrium model of Irish agriculture is used to explore differing future outcomes in terms of the sector's size and associated GHG emissions to 2030. The scenario analysis employed demonstrates the implications of different future pathways for bovine (dairy and beef) agriculture, the dominant sector in Irish agriculture and the principal source of its GHG emissions. Mitigation actions are then factored in to provide measures of future levels of emissions inclusive of this mitigation capacity. While technical mitigation actions are largely grounded in interventions that are based on science, the scenario analysis makes clear that the scale of the ultimate challenge in mitigating agricultural GHG emissions will be determined by the overall size of the agriculture sector and the intensity of production per hectare. The dairy and beef sectors in Ireland are noteworthy for their contrasting levels of profitability; dependence on support payments; and farm income. Now that the EU milk quota has been eliminated, from the perspective of economic development, an increase in the size of the dairy sector and entry into the dairy sector are desirable economic policy objectives. However, the paper demonstrates the strong contrast between dairy and beef farms, not just in terms of income but also in terms of intensity of production per hectare and the associated level of emissions produced. It follows that a transition from beef production to dairy production, while desirable from the point of view of farm income, could have adverse consequences for emissions.

Policy harmonized (PH) approach allows for the quantitative assessment of the impact of various elements of EU CAP direct support schemes, where the production effects of direct payments are accounted through reaction prices formed by producer price and policy price add-ons. Using the AGMEMOD model the impacts of two possible EU agricultural policy scenarios upon beef production have been analysed – full decoupling with a switch from historical to regional Single Payment scheme or alternatively with re-distribution of country direct payment envelopes via introduction of EU-wide flat area payment. The PH approach, by systematizing and harmonizing the management and use of policy data, ensures that projected differential policy impacts arising from changes in common EU policies reflect the likely actual differential impact as opposed to differences in how "common" policies are implemented within analytical models. In the second section of the paper the AGMEMOD model's structure is explained. The policy harmonized evaluation method is presented in the third section. Results from an application of the PH approach are presented and discussed in the paper's penultimate section, while section 5 concludes.

Policy harmonized (PH) approach allows for the quantitative assessment of the impact of various elements of EU CAP direct support schemes, where the production effects of direct payments are accounted through reaction prices formed by producer price and policy price add-ons. Using the AGMEMOD model the impacts of two possible EU agricultural policy scenarios upon beef production have been analysed – full decoupling with a switch from historical to regional Single Payment scheme or alternatively with re-distribution of country direct payment envelopes via introduction of EU-wide flat area payment. The PH approach, by systematizing and harmonizing the management and use of policy data, ensures that projected differential policy impacts arising from changes in common EU policies reflect the likely actual differential impact as opposed to differences in how "common" policies are implemented within analytical models. In the second section of the paper the AGMEMOD model's structure is explained. The policy harmonized evaluation method is presented in the third section. Results from an application of the PH approach are presented and discussed in the paper's penultimate section, while section 5 concludes.

peer-reviewed ; Sustainable food production has re-emerged at the top of the global policy agenda, driven by two challenges: (1) the challenge to produce enough food to feed a growing world population and (2) the challenge to make more efficient and prudent use of the world's natural resources. These challenges have led to a societal expectation that the agricultural sector increase productivity, and at the same time provide environmental 'ecosystem services' such as the provision of clean water, air, habitats for biodiversity, recycling of nutrients and mitigation against climate change. Whilst the degree to which agriculture can provide individual ecosystem services has been well researched, it is unclear how and to what extent agriculture can meet all expectations relating to environmental sustainability simultaneously, whilst increasing the quantity of food outputs. In this paper, we present a conceptual framework for the quantification of the 'supply of' and 'demand for' agricultural, soil-based ecosystem services or 'soil functions'. We use Irish agriculture as a case-study for this framework, using proxy-indicators to determine the demand for individual soil functions, as set by agri-environmental policies, as well as the supply of soil functions, as defined by land use and soil type. We subsequently discuss how this functionality of soils can be managed or incentivised through policy measures, with a view to minimising the divergence between agronomic policies designed to promote increased agricultural production and environmental policy objectives. Finally, we discuss the applicability of this conceptual framework to agriculture and agri-environmental policies at EU level, and the implications for policy makers.

While the evolution of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) until 2013 is clear, European Union (EU) budgetary pressures and the perceived unfairness of the distribution of CAP support across Member States has lead to uncertainty over the design of the CAP post 2013. One comprehensive reform option being considered is the implementation of an EU wide flat area payment (EUWFAP) system and a reduction of the total budget available for direct payments. It is hypothesised that the implementation of this policy proposal would lead to significant changes in the distribution of the EU budget and to the redistribution of agricultural production between the Member States, which could hinder the implementation of the proposal. This paper evaluates the rationality of the EUWFAP, based on the analysis of its budgetary and market impacts. Using the AGMEMOD 2020 combined model, the introduction of the EUWFAP in 2013 is compared with a baseline continuation of the current policy. Results suggest that there would be minor negative impacts on the agricultural production at the EU level, but that more substantial impact for some commodities, most notably beef, and could occur in the individual EU Member States. An important outcome of such a policy reform would be a substantial change in the budget allocation between Member States, which could help mitigate the budgetary tensions between the Member States.

While the evolution of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) until 2013 is clear, European Union (EU) budgetary pressures and the perceived unfairness of the distribution of CAP support across Member States has lead to uncertainty over the design of the CAP post 2013. One comprehensive reform option being considered is the implementation of an EU wide flat area payment (EUWFAP) system and a reduction of the total budget available for direct payments. It is hypothesised that the implementation of this policy proposal would lead to significant changes in the distribution of the EU budget and to the redistribution of agricultural production between the Member States, which could hinder the implementation of the proposal. This paper evaluates the rationality of the EUWFAP, based on the analysis of its budgetary and market impacts. Using the AGMEMOD 2020 combined model, the introduction of the EUWFAP in 2013 is compared with a baseline continuation of the current policy. Results suggest that there would be minor negative impacts on the agricultural production at the EU level, but that more substantial impact for some commodities, most notably beef, and could occur in the individual EU Member States. An important outcome of such a policy reform would be a substantial change in the budget allocation between Member States, which could help mitigate the budgetary tensions between the Member States.

Policy, administration and industry need medium-term projections of the expected developments in the agri-food markets for their decision-making processes. The EU Commission presents such projections for the EU as a whole in December of each year. Those projections and their assumptions regarding policy and macroeconomic developments are depicted to the level of individual EU Member States with the exception of Luxembourg, which is included in the figures of Belgium, by applying the partial equilibrium model AGMEMOD. The working paper briefly describes the approach to establish projections for the EU Member States. The projections cover the markets of main agricultural products, in particular for cereals and oilseeds (rapeseed and sunflower seed), livestock (cattle, pigs, goats and sheep), meat (beef, pork, and poultry), milk and dairy products (drinking milk, butter, cheese, skimmed milk powder, whole milk and semi-skimmed milk powder). The outcomes comprise items like areas, livestock numbers, yields, production, trade and use, as well as prices. The individual projection results are displayed in tables. ; Politik, Administration und Wirtschaft benötigen für ihre Entscheidungen mittelfristige Projektionen über die zu erwartenden Entwicklungen auf den Märkten der Agrar- und Ernährungswirtschaft. Die EU-Kommission legt solche Projektionen für die EU als Ganzes im Dezember jedes Jahres vor. Diese Projektionen und ihre Annahmen bezüglich politischer Maßnahmen und makroökonomischer Entwicklungen werden mit Hilfe des partiellen Modellsystems AGMEMOD auf die einzelnen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten mit der Ausnahme von Luxemburg, das mit Belgien regional zusammengefasst wird, herunter gebrochen. Das Working Paper beschreibt kurz den Ansatz, wie die Projektionen für die Mitgliedsstaaten erstellt werden. Die Projektionen umfassen die Märkte für wichtige Agrarprodukte, und zwar insbesondere für Getreide und Ölsaaten (Raps- und Sonnenblumensaat), für Vieh (Rinder, Schweine, Ziegen und Schafe), Fleisch (Rind-, Schweine- und Geflügelfleisch), Milch und Milchprodukte (Trinkmilch, Butter, Käse, Magermilchpulver, Vollmilch und teilentrahmtes Milchpulver) und decken Anbauflächen, Tierbestände, Produktion, Handel und Verwendung sowie Preise ab. Die einzelnen Projektionsergebnisse werden in tabellarischer Form aufbereitet dargestellt.

Policy, administration and industry need medium-term projections of the expected developments in the agri-food markets for their decision-making processes. The EU Commission presents such projections for the EU as a whole in December of each year. Those projections and their assumptions regarding policy and macroeconomic developments are depicted to the level of individual EU Member States with the exception of Luxembourg, which is included in the figures of Belgium, by applying the partial equilibrium model AGMEMOD. The working paper briefly describes the approach to establish projections for the EU Member States. The projections cover the markets of main agricultural products, in particular for cereals and oilseeds (rapeseed and sunflower seed), livestock (cattle, pigs, goats and sheep), meat (beef, pork, and poultry), milk and dairy products (drinking milk, butter, cheese, skimmed milk powder, whole milk and semi-skimmed milk powder). The outcomes comprise items like areas, livestock numbers, yields, production, trade and use, as well as prices. The individual projection results are displayed in tables. ; Politik, Administration und Wirtschaft benötigen für ihre Entscheidungen mittelfristige Projektionen über die zu erwartenden Entwicklungen auf den Märkten der Agrar- und Ernährungswirtschaft. Die EU-Kommission legt solche Projektionen für die EU als Ganzes im Dezember jedes Jahres vor. Diese Projektionen und ihre Annahmen bezüglich politischer Maßnahmen und makroökonomischer Entwicklungen werden mit Hilfe des partiellen Modellsystems AGMEMOD auf die einzelnen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten mit der Ausnahme von Luxemburg, das mit Belgien regional zusammengefasst wird, herunter gebrochen. Das Working Paper beschreibt kurz den Ansatz, wie die Projektionen für die Mitgliedsstaaten erstellt werden. Die Projektionen umfassen die Märkte für wichtige Agrarprodukte, und zwar insbesondere für Getreide und Ölsaaten (Raps- und Sonnenblumensaat), für Vieh (Rinder, Schweine, Ziegen und Schafe), Fleisch (Rind-, Schweine- und Geflügelfleisch), Milch und Milchprodukte (Trinkmilch, Butter, Käse, Magermilchpulver, Vollmilch und teilentrahmtes Milchpulver) und decken Anbauflächen, Tierbestände, Produktion, Handel und Verwendung sowie Preise ab. Die einzelnen Projektionsergebnisse werden in tabellarischer Form aufbereitet dargestellt.

This technical note provides the detailed projection results of the study "Modelling and Analysis of the European Milk and Dairy Market".