IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v18y2019i3p10-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Efficient is the French Less‐Favoured Area Programme?

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Vollet
  • Alessandra Kirsch

Abstract

Evaluation of the French Less Favoured Area (LFA) agricultural programme over the period 2007–2013 calls into question the cost‐efficiency of this multi‐objective programme. This article confirms the multiplicity of objectives assigned to this programme, namely to maintain a sustainable agriculture in mountainous areas through income support for farmers in these disadvantaged areas; and thus more indirectly, to enhance the attractiveness of these agricultural areas. The environmental assessment of farms in the FADN network showed that the French LFA programme did help to support the most environmentally friendly dairy and cattle farms in mountainous areas via support for the income levels of these livestock farms. However, the analysis also shows that the LFA criteria are not sufficiently specific to have the required impacts on grassland management practices that would lead to specific defined environmentally friendly practices and improvements. Overall, and in spite of its longstanding and multi‐objective nature, the French LFA programme has been effective both from an economic perspective in that it inspires confidence among economic agents; and also to some extent from a general environmental perspective by providing support for farms which hold most of the permanent grassland, and associated amenities. L’évaluation du programme agricole français en faveur des zones défavorisées sur la période 2007–2013 remet en question le rapport coût‐efficacité de ce programme à objectifs multiples. Cet article confirme la multiplicité des objectifs assignés à ce programme, à savoir: maintenir une agriculture durable dans les zones montagneuses grâce au soutien des revenus des agriculteurs de ces zones défavorisées; et donc plus indirectement, renforcer l'attractivité de ces zones agricoles. L’évaluation environnementale des exploitations du réseau RICA a montré que le programme français en faveur des zones défavorisées contribuait effectivement à aider, dans les zones montagneuses, les exploitations laitières et d’élevage bovin les plus respectueuses de l'environnement en soutenant leur niveau de revenu. Cependant, l'analyse montre également que les critères du programme ne sont pas suffisamment spécifiques pour avoir les impacts requis sur les pratiques de gestion des prairies, permettant de conduire à des pratiques respectueuses de l'environnement préalablement définies et à des améliorations en la matière. Globalement, et malgré sa longévité et ses objectifs multiples, le programme en faveur des zones défavorisées français s'est révélé efficace tant du point de vue économique en ce qu'il inspire confiance aux agents économiques; que, dans une certaine mesure, d'un point de vue environnemental général, en fournissant un soutien aux exploitations qui possèdent la plupart des prairies permanentes et les aménités associées. Die Bewertung des französischen Förderprogramms für benachteiligte Gebiete (LFA) im Zeitraum der Jahre 2007 bis 2013 wirft die Frage nach der Kosteneffizienz dieses Programms mit seinen vielfältigen Zielen auf. Der vorliegende Beitrag bestätigt die zahlreichen Zielsetzungen in diesem Programm, nämlich den Erhalt einer nachhaltigen Landwirtschaft in Bergregionen. Als Instrument diente eine Einkommensstützung für landwirtschaftliche Betriebe in diesen benachteiligten Gebieten, wodurch auf indirektem Weg auch die Attraktivität dieser landwirtschaftlichen Regionen gefördert wird. Die Analyse von Betrieben aus dem InformationsNetz Landwirtschaftlicher Buchführungen (INLB) ergab, dass das Programm durch eine am Einkommen orientierte Beihilfe diejenigen Milchvieh‐ und Rinderhaltungsbetriebe in den Bergregionen förderte, die am umweltfreundlichsten wirtschafteten. Auf der anderen Seite zeigt die Analyse jedoch, dass die Kriterien für benachteiligte Gebiete nicht spezifisch genug sind. Dadurch treten nicht die erforderlichen Wirkungen auf die Grünlandbewirtschaftung ein, die zu bestimmten, genau definierten umweltfreundlichen Praktiken und zu Verbesserungen führen würden. Insgesamt war das französische Förderprogramm für benachteiligte Gebiete ‐ trotz seiner langjährigen Laufzeit und den vielfältigen Zielsetzungen ‐ aus ökonomischer Sicht wirksam, da es die Vertrauensbildung zwischen Wirtschaftsakteuren angeregt hat. Auch aus allgemeiner ökologischer Sicht war das Programm in gewisser Weise erfolgreich, da es die Betriebe, die den größten Anteil an Dauergrünland und die damit verbundene Ausstattung besitzen, unterstützt hat.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Vollet & Alessandra Kirsch, 2019. "How Efficient is the French Less‐Favoured Area Programme?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 18(3), pages 10-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:18:y:2019:i:3:p:10-17
    DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12241
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1746-692X.12241?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain & Subervie, Julie, 2013. "How much green for the buck? Estimating additional and windfall effects of French agro-environmental schemes by DID-matching," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 12-27.
    2. Stefan Mann & Simon Lanz, 2013. "Happy Tinbergen: Switzerland's New Direct Payment System," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 24-28, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    2. Roggendorf, Wolfgang & Schwarze, Stefan, 2020. "Die Wirkung von Agrarumweltmaßnahmen auf betriebliche Stickstoffbilanzen – Empirische Ergebnisse aus Nordrhein-Westfalen," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305604, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    3. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    4. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain, 2017. "Should We Combine Difference In Differences with Conditioning on Pre-Treatment Outcomes?," TSE Working Papers 17-824, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Cloé Garnache & Scott M. Swinton & Joseph A. Herriges & Frank Lupi & R. Jan Stevenson, 2016. "Solving the Phosphorus Pollution Puzzle: Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1334-1359.
    6. Jean-Marc Blazy & Julie Subervie & Jacky Paul & François Causeret & Loic Guinde & Sarah Moulla & Alban Thomas & Jorge Sierra, 2020. "Ex ante assessment of the cost-effectiveness of Agri-Environmental Schemes promoting compost use to sequester carbon in soils in Guadeloupe," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02748634, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    7. Drogué, Sophie & Jacquet, Florence & Subervie, Julie, 2014. "Introduction: Farmer’s adaptation to environmental changes," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 95(1).
    8. Plastina, Alejandro & Liu, Fangge & Sawadgo, Wendiam, 2018. "Additionality in cover-crop cost-share programs in Iowa: a matching assessment," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274454, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Laure Kuhfuss & Julie Subervie, 2015. "Do agri-environmental schemes help reduce herbicide use? Evidence from a natural experiment in France," Post-Print hal-01199067, HAL.
    10. Margaux Lapierre & Alexandre Sauquet & Julie Subervie, 2019. "Providing technical assistance to peer networks to reduce pesticide use in Europe: Evidence from the French Ecophyto plan," Working Papers hal-02190979, HAL.
    11. Daria Loginova & Marco Portmann & Martin Huber, 2021. "Assessing the Effects of Seasonal Tariff‐rate Quotas on Vegetable Prices in Switzerland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 607-627, June.
    12. Philippe Coent, 2023. "Payment for environmental services related to aquifers: a review of specific issues and existing programmes," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 273-310, December.
    13. AJ A. Bostian & Moriah B. Bostian & Marita Laukkanen & Antti Simola, 2020. "Assessing the productivity consequences of agri-environmental practices when adoption is endogenous," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 141-162, April.
    14. Robert Finger & Nadja El Benni, 2021. "Farm income in European agriculture: new perspectives on measurement and implications for policy evaluation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(2), pages 253-265.
    15. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    16. Pappalardo, Gioacchino & West, Grant Howard & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Toscano, Sabrina & Pecorino, Biagio, 2022. "The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. Lindström, Hanna & Lundberg, Sofia & Marklund, Per-Olov, 2020. "How Green Public Procurement can drive conversion of farmland: An empirical analysis of an organic food policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    18. Mathilde Baudrier & Valentin Bellassen & Claudine Foucherot, 2015. "La précédente Politique Agricole Commune (2003-2013) a réduit les émissions agricoles françaises," Working Papers hal-01152980, HAL.
    19. Michler, Jeffrey D. & Baylis, Kathy & Arends-Kuenning, Mary & Mazvimavi, Kizito, 2019. "Conservation agriculture and climate resilience," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 148-169.
    20. Philippe Le Coent & Coralie Calvet, 2016. "Challenges of achieving biodiversity offsetting through agri-environmental schemes: evidence from an empirical study," Working Papers 16-10, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:18:y:2019:i:3:p:10-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.