IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa109/44847.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The European Commission In The Cap Decision Making: A Case Study On The Sugar Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Iagatti, Matteo
  • Sorrentino, Alessandro

Abstract

This paper represents the first step of a wider research project on the relation between the EU institutional settings and the policy outcome. We specifically tackle the CAP definition process and the role of the Commission inside consultation procedure, proposing a case study on the sugar CMO reform of 2006. Using and adapting the theoretical framework proposed by Putnam (1988) we first check the suitability of sugar for such analysis than we reconstruct the various phases of the sugar CMO definition process evaluating qualitatively, the main issue in discussion, MSs position in relation also to the final outcome and the role played by the Commission in this context. The analysis is carried out as a documental study in which we collected and evaluate the documents produced by different bodies during the reform process together with interviews with commission internals in order to validate our hypothesis. The objective is to point out winners and losers of the reform process, highlighting the circumstances in which the Commission could have acted in order to compensate losers. Moreover, understand how such compensations could have helped the Commission in safeguarding the guidelines for the reform it supports.

Suggested Citation

  • Iagatti, Matteo & Sorrentino, Alessandro, 2008. "The European Commission In The Cap Decision Making: A Case Study On The Sugar Reform," 109th Seminar, November 20-21, 2008, Viterbo, Italy 44847, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa109:44847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/44847
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CAP Reform; Sugar reform; Institutional settings; Consultation procedure; CMO; Agricultural and Food Policy; Political Economy; Q10; Q18.;

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General

    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:eaa109:44847. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.