IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aesc11/108957.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What role for public goods in the future of CAP?

Author

Listed:
  • Harvey, David R.
  • Jambor, Attila

Abstract

The European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy continues to evolve. The public debate about its future post 2013 was launched in April 2010 and a formal Commission Communication on the future of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) was published in November 2010 (European Commission, 2010). The Commission’s detailed legislative proposals are now expected in October 2011. We focus here on one of the most important parts of the debate – public goods and the ‘greening of the CAP’. A major rationale for the large sums spent under the CAP each year appears now to be centred on the provision of public goods. We review the Commission’s proposals for the provision of public goods and raise questions about the apparent justification for the general approach. We question whether this logic properly appreciates the nature of public good problems and whether the apparently obvious solution – provision of compensatory payments from the public purse – actually solves any of the underlying public good problems

Suggested Citation

  • Harvey, David R. & Jambor, Attila, 2011. "What role for public goods in the future of CAP?," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108957, Agricultural Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesc11:108957
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.108957
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/108957/files/82Harvey_Jambor.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.108957?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. David R. Harvey, 2003. "Agri‐environmental Relationships and Multi‐functionality: Further Considerations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 705-725, May.
    2. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    3. Barbier Edward B & Heal Geoffrey M, 2006. "Valuing Ecosystem Services," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-6, February.
    4. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    5. Zahrnt, Valentin, 2009. "Public Money for Public Goods: Winners and Losers from CAP Reform," ECIPE Working Papers 51300, European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Malý, Michal & Žáková Kroupová, Zdeňka & Čechura, L. & Hálová, P. & Havlíková, M., 2016. "Identification and Valuation of Public Goods within the Vertical of Cattle Breeding," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, March.

    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. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    2. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    3. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li & Chen, Xiaodong, 2021. "Normative, livelihood, and demographic influences on enrollment in a payment for ecosystem services program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    6. Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Challenges in ecosystem services governance: Multi-levels, multi-actors, multi-rationalities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 150-157.
    7. Dzeraviaha, Ihar, 2018. "Mainstream economics toolkit within the ecological economics framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 15-21.
    8. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & à vila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    9. Claudia Kettner & Angela Köppl & Sigrid Stagl, 2014. "Towards an Operational Measurement of Socio-ecological Performance. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 52," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47154, April.
    10. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    11. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    12. Costanza, Robert, 2020. "Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    13. Polishchuk, Yuliana & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2012. "Beyond “benefits”? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 103-111.
    14. Rico García-Amado, Luis & Ruiz Pérez, Manuel & Barrasa García, Sara, 2013. "Motivation for conservation: Assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in La Sepultura Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 92-100.
    15. Marie Hrabanski, 2017. "Private Sector Involvement in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Using a UN platform to promote market-based instruments for ecosystem services," Post-Print hal-02958744, HAL.
    16. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    17. Cisilino, Federica & Marangon, Francesco & Troiano, Stefania, 2015. "Conservation and efficient use of natural resources through Payments for Ecosystem Services: the role of CAP in supporting a collective approach," 147th Seminar, October 7-8, 2015, Sofia, Bulgaria 212247, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Muradian, Roldan & Rival, Laura, 2012. "Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 93-100.
    19. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    20. Giovanni Lagioia & Annarita Paiano, 2011. "Payments for Environmental Services: Ambitious Tools for the Sustainable Use of Natural Capital," MIC 2011: Managing Sustainability? Proceedings of the 12th International Conference, Portorož, 23–26 November 2011 [Selected Papers],, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Economics;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aesc11:108957. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aesukea.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.