IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v41y2024i1d10.1007_s10460-023-10474-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agriculture and environment: friends or foes? Conceptualising agri-environmental discourses under the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Ilona Rac

    (University of Ljubljana Biotechnical faculty)

  • Karmen Erjavec

    (University of Novo Mesto)

  • Emil Erjavec

    (University of Ljubljana Biotechnical faculty)

Abstract

The European Union’s common agricultural policy (CAP), in addition to its primary production and farm income goals, is a large source of funding for environmentally friendly agricultural practices. However, its schemes have variable success and uptake across member states (MS) and regions. This study tries to explain these differences by demonstrating differences between policy levels in the understanding of the relationship between nature and farming. To compare constructs and values of the respective policy communities, their discursive construction as it appears in the main strategic EU and MS agricultural policy documents is analysed. The theoretical framework integrates elements from existing frameworks of CAP and environmental discourse analysis; specific agri-environmental discourses, their elements and interplay, are identified. The six discourses suggested here are ‘Productivism’, ‘Classical neoliberal’, ‘Ecological modernisation’, ‘Administrative’, ‘Multifunctionality’ and ‘Radical green’. The discourse analysis of selected documents reveals that there are indeed differences in how farming and the environment are generally conceptualised at different levels of CAP decision-making. At EU level, farming is primarily understood as a sector whose main task is to produce food (‘Productivism’), and the environment is used as a justification for CAP payments (‘Multifunctionality’). At the national/regional level, Rural Development Programmes reflect different value systems: in England, environmental protection is mainly seen as sound management of natural capital (‘Classical neoliberal’); in Finland, a benefit for producers and conscious consumers (‘Ecological modernisation’); in Croatia, a necessity limiting productivity (‘Productivism’) and imposed by an external authority (‘Administrative’ discourse). This diversity shows that differences can visibly manifest despite the Commission constraining the discursive space, helping to explain the differential implementation and success of environmental measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilona Rac & Karmen Erjavec & Emil Erjavec, 2024. "Agriculture and environment: friends or foes? Conceptualising agri-environmental discourses under the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(1), pages 147-166, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:41:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10474-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-023-10474-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-023-10474-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-023-10474-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stupak, Nataliya & Sanders, Jürn & Heinrich, Barbara, 2019. "The Role of Farmers' Understanding of Nature in Shaping their Uptake of Nature Protection Measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 301-311.
    2. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    3. Grady, Patrick & Macmillan, Kathleen, 1999. "Seattle and Beyond: The WTO Millennium Round," MPRA Paper 2989, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Coleman, William D. & Skogstad, Grace D. & Atkinson, Michael M., 1996. "Paradigm Shifts and Policy Networks: Cumulative Change in Agriculture," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 273-301, September.
    5. Erjavec, Karmen & Erjavec, Emil, 2009. "Changing EU agricultural policy discourses? The discourse analysis of Commissioner's speeches 2000-2007," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 218-226, April.
    6. Devesh Kapur & Megan Crowley, 2008. "Beyond the ABCs: Higher Education and Developing Countries," Working Papers 139, Center for Global Development.
    7. Tasic Slavisa, 2011. "Are Regulators Rational?," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Bazyli Czyżewski & Agnieszka Sapa & Piotr Kułyk, 2021. "Human Capital and Eco-Contractual Governance in Small Farms in Poland: Simultaneous Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Ordinal Variables," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    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. Mennig, Philipp, 2025. "Who cares about agriculture? Analyzing German parliamentary debates on agriculture and food with structural topic modeling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    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. Johan Swinnen & Alessandro Olper & Senne Vandevelde, 2021. "From unfair prices to unfair trading practices: Political economy, value chains and 21st century agri‐food policy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(5), pages 771-788, September.
    5. Eshita Gupta & Bharat Ramaswami & E. Somanathan, 2021. "The Distributional Impact of Climate Change: Why Food Prices Matter," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 249-275, July.
    6. Christophe Gouel, 2016. "Trade Policy Coordination and Food Price Volatility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1018-1037.
    7. Natalia V. TRUSOVA & Oleksandr S. PRYSTEMSKYI & Oksana V. HRYVKIVSKA & Alina Zh. SAKUN & Yurii Y. KYRYLOV, 2021. "Modeling Of System Factors Of Financial Security Of Agricultural Enterprises Of Ukraine," Regional Science Inquiry, Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(1), pages 169-182, June.
    8. Hendricks, Nathan P. & Smith, Aaron D. & Villoria, Nelson B., 2018. "Global Agricultural Supply Response to Persistent Price Shocks," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274338, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Syeda Mubashira Batool & Zhimin Liu, 2021. "Exploring the relationships between socio-economic indicators and student enrollment in higher education institutions of Pakistan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Gwen DeBoe & Koen Deconinck & Ben Henderson & Jussi Lankoski, 2020. "Reforming Agricultural Policies Will Help to Improve Environmental Performance," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 19(1), pages 30-35, April.
    11. C. Peter Timmer, 2014. "Food Security in Asia and the Pacific: The Rapidly Changing Role of Rice," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 73-90, January.
    12. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2020. "Who has the better story? On the narrative foundations of agricultural development dichotomies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    13. Kym Anderson, 2023. "Why did agriculture’s share of Australian GDP not decline for a century?," Departmental Working Papers 2023-09, The Australian National University, Arndt-Corden Department of Economics.
    14. Kym Anderson & Sundar Ponnusamy, 2019. "Structural Transformation to Manufacturing and Services: What Role for Trade?," Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 36(2), pages 32-71, September.
    15. Feng, Lei & Zhang, Minghui & Li, Yixin & Jiang, Yan, 2020. "Satisfaction principle or efficiency principle? Decision-making behavior of peasant households in China’s rural land market," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    16. Digvijay S. Negi, 2024. "State Mediated Trade, Distortions and Air Pollution," Working Papers 129, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    17. repec:ilo:ilowps:993712353402676 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Johan F. M. Swinnen & Louise Knops & Kristine van Herck, 2013. "Food Price Volatility and EU Policies," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2013-032, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    19. Knops, Louise & van Herck, Kristine & Swinnen, Johan F. M., 2013. "Food Price Volatility and EU Policies," WIDER Working Paper Series 032, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Nguyen, Hoa-Thi-Minh & Do, Huong & Kompas, Tom, 2021. "Economic efficiency versus social equity: The productivity challenge for rice production in a ‘greying’ rural Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    21. Dorin, Bruno & Joly, Pierre-Benoît, 2020. "Modelling world agriculture as a learning machine? From mainstream models to Agribiom 1.0," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:41:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10474-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.