Suchergebnisse

Agricultural policy in the EU is facing further reform arising from the CAP Health Check in 2008, international agricultural markets are being affected by the emergence of bio fuel demands for grains and oilseeds, while an agricultural trade liberalising outcome from the WTO negotiations in Geneva remains a possibility. Farmers and policy makers in EU Member States are facing an increasingly volatile future. The importance of economic analysis of policy proposals has never been greater. This paper presents the results of Baseline projections for the main EU-27 agricultural commodity markets based on the AGMEMOD econometric models developed in projects financed by the European Commission.

Agricultural policy in the EU is facing further reform arising from the CAP Health Check in 2008, international agricultural markets are being affected by the emergence of bio fuel demands for grains and oilseeds, while an agricultural trade liberalising outcome from the WTO negotiations in Geneva remains a possibility. Farmers and policy makers in EU Member States are facing an increasingly volatile future. The importance of economic analysis of policy proposals has never been greater. This paper presents the results of Baseline projections for the main EU-27 agricultural commodity markets based on the AGMEMOD econometric models developed in projects financed by the European Commission.

Contrat ; B03421 ; Agricultural sector in the member states and EU : econmetric Modelling for projections and analysis of EU policies on agriculture, forestry and the environment [AG-MEMOD] ; Les auteurs présentent les résultats pour l'UE à 15 pays d'une simulation de la réforme dite "accord de Luxembourg" réalisée à l'aide du modèle Ag-Memod combiné. Ce modèle économétrique, dynamique, d'équilibre partiel et multi-produits est composé de modèles nationaux, liés entre eux par des prix endogènes pour produire des projections annuelles, à un horizon de dix ans, pour chaque pays et pour l'Union européenne en globalité. Dans le cadre du scénario de réforme des accords de Luxembourg, les paiements directs des secteurs des céréales et oléagineux, de la viande bovine et de la viande ovine sont totalement découplés. Les réductions programmées du prix d'intervention du beurre sont également considérées. Les impacts de la réforme sont mesurés relativement à une base de référence constituée d'une prolongation de la politique agricole de l'Agenda 2000.

This book grasps the opportunity to show the strength of AGMEMOD in terms of baseline analysis at detailed regional and market levels, supported by an experienced team of country-based modellers. This analysis, produced using the AGMEMOD model, will be of interest to researchers working in the field of agricultural policy analysis as well as to policy makers from both the European Commission and its member states' agriculture ministries

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.

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.

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

This report is based on the outcome of a study carried out by the AGMEMOD Consortium under the management of the Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI), in cooperation with the European Commission's Joint Research Centre – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS). The report provides a quantitative assessment of possible implications of a dairy policy reform and other policy adjustments on the milk and dairy market as well as on other agricultural markets in the EU-27, EU-15, EU-12, the individual Member States and their regional groupings using the AGMEMOD model.

peer-reviewed ; This analysis quantifies the potential to abate national ammonia (NH3) emissions up to 2030. This report is an updated marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) analysis where Teagasc has quantified the abatement potential of a range of ammonia mitigation measures, as well as their associated costs/benefits (see Lanigan et al. 2015 for previous analysis). The objective of this analysis is to quantify the extent and costs associated with meeting future ammonia emission targets that were negotiated as part of the amended Clean Air Policy Package. The requirement to reduce ammonia emissions is urgent, both in terms of compliance with the National Emissions Ceilings Directive (NECD), and as a principal loss pathway for agricultural nitrogen (N). Improvement of N efficiency is a key focus for improving farm efficiency and sustainability as well as reducing the ammonia, nitrate and greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of agriculture. This is particularly relevant in the context of the national strategies on the development of the agri-food sector: Food Wise 2025, Ag-food strategy 2030 and Ag-Climatise (currently under development) and the newly unveiled EU Farm to Fork Strategy, which is a part of the European Green Deal. Under the baseline scenario (S1), agricultural ammonia emissions are projected to increase by 9% (without any mitigation) by 2030 relative to 2005 levels. While these increases are small in comparison to the targeted increase in agricultural output, they will provide a major challenge to meeting emissions targets, particularly as agriculture comprises over 99% of national emissions. The analysis presented in this report seeks to quantify the ammonia mitigation potential under likely uptake pathways. This is not an exhaustive analysis of all mitigation measures, but represents an assessment of best available techniques, based on scientific, peer-reviewed research carried out by Teagasc and associated national and international research partners. Indeed, any future changes in the sector or in the national emission inventory calculations will require further analysis of the applicability of ammonia mitigation techniques, particularly in terms of housing and storage but also in the context of other reactive N1 emissions. It should also be noted that some mitigation measures, particularly those related to nitrogen application to soils, could result in either higher greenhouse gas emissions or higher nitrate leaching. Compared to a future where no mitigation measures are deployed to address emissions, by 2030 the average technical abatement2 potential was estimated to be approximately 15.26 kt NH3 at a net cost of €10.86 million per annum. However, it should be noted that the net cost (€10.86 million) is comprised of 6 measures that are cost negative (-€22.21 million) and 7 measures that are cost positive (€33.07) and that some of the cost negative measures are predicated on efficiency gains driven by best management practice adoption (e.g. liming and clover measures with associate chemical N reductions). Amongst the thirteen mitigation measures selected for this analysis, 80% of the mitigation potential can be achieved by the full implementation of the mitigation pathways for protected urea and low emission slurry spreading (LESS) techniques for bovines. It should be stressed that this is an assessment of the maximum abatement potential and realising this level of abatement in practice will be extremely challenging. Any increase in agricultural activity beyond the baseline scenario will increase absolute emissions. The level of mitigation achievable is based on the draft AgClimatise measures any delay or reduction in the uptake of these measures will reduce the mitigation achieved. It must also be ensured that all mitigation measures should, where possible, be synergistic with reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and N loss to water.

This summary report is based on the outcome of a study carried out by the AGMEMOD Partnership under the management of the Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI, in the Netherlands), in cooperation with the Joint Research Centre – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS) to generate projections for the main agricultural commodity markets for each year from 2005 until 2015. The report gives a general overview of the modelling approach, the description and implementation of the baseline, further CAP reform and exchange rate change scenarios. It outlines the main results for the aggregates EU-10, EU-15, EU-25 and EU-27, focusing in particular on the features implemented in this study, and addresses issues that need further attention. Detailed documentation on the AGMEMOD modelling approach, along with the outcome of the study, is published in five reports in the JRC-IPTS technical paper series under the heading "Impact analysis of Common Agricultural Policy reform on the main agricultural commodities".