IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae89/239279.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consequences of 2003 CAP Reform for Dutch Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Tabeau, Andrzej
  • van Leeuwen, Myrna

Abstract

This paper examines the medium term consequences of the Luxembourg CAP reform agreement in June 2003 for Dutch agriculture. Under this agreement, the EC has proposed to reduce the amount of support to EU agriculture that is coupled to agricultural production and to replace it through decoupled payments. The Netherlands has chosen for fully decoupled direct payments for crops, sucker cows, bulls and ewe premiums, while it holds the slaughter premiums for calves and adult cattle coupled. As the effect of this policy measures will largely depend on the extent that the decoupled support will influence the behavior of the farmers regarding their real production decisions, we have experimented with different ‘behavioral repercussion’ levels for decoupled payments. By evaluating the effects of these experiments on farmer’s income levels, we could determine a kind of “optimal” farmers’ behavior as the result of decupling of payments. The CAP impact is measured against the baseline scenario, which is a view of the Dutch agricultural sector under the unchanged CAP (continuation of Agenda 2000). To construct the baseline and address the CAP effect, we have used the Dutch sub-model of AG-MEMOD model. This is an econometric, dynamic, multi-product partial equilibrium commodity model that includes the major arable crops and animal products. The dynamic characteristic of the model allows for multi-annual projections. Our simulation results show that the decoupling of direct payments will importantly influence the Dutch agricultural sector. In the grain sector, the farmers’ productions decisions will not be affected by the decoupling, i.e., farmers will continue to produce grains as would the policy not have changed. However, we expect a significant impact of the decoupling on the farmers’ income in this sector because the reactions of production costs and grain prices on production changes is relatively low compared with the decrease in grain production. In the beef and veal sector, producers are expected to react fully on decoupled payments. Thus, they would treat the new payments as fully decoupled. However, the incomes in the beef and veal sector will not be significantly changed. Although the reduced animal stock will negatively influence the income level, the lower production cost and higher producer prices will compensate for this effect. At last, the implementation of the new CAP will significantly lower the dairy prices and negatively influence the production levels. Nevertheless, the compensation payments will keep the farmers’ incomes in this sector above the baseline level.

Suggested Citation

  • Tabeau, Andrzej & van Leeuwen, Myrna, 2005. "Consequences of 2003 CAP Reform for Dutch Agriculture," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 239279, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae89:239279
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.239279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/239279/files/Tabeau%20et%20al.%202005%20Consequences%20of%202003%20CAP%20Reform%20for%20Dutch%20Agriculture.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.239279?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. Unknown, 2003. "Decoupled Payments: Household Income Transfers In Contemporary U.S. Agriculture," Agricultural Economic Reports 34057, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Salamon, Petra & Chantreuil, Frederic & Donnellan, Trevor & Erjavec, Emil & Esposti, Roberto & Hanrahan, Kevin F. & van Leeuwen, Myrna & Bouma, Foppe & Dol, Wietse & Salputra, Guna, 2008. "How to deal with the challenges of linking a large number of individual national models: the case of the AGMEMOD Partnership," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 57(08), pages 1-6.
    2. Chantreuil, Frederic & Donnellan, Trevor & van Leeuwen, Myrna & Salamon, Petra & Tabeau, Andrzej A. & Bartova, Lubica, 2008. "EU Dairy Quota Reform – AGMEMOD Scenario Analysis," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43655, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Liu, Yue & Yao, Shunbo & Lin, Ying, 2018. "Effect of Key Priority Forestry Programs on off-farm employment: Evidence from Chinese rural households," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 24-37.
    2. Thia C. Hennessy & Tahir Rehman, 2008. "Assessing the Impact of the ‘Decoupling’ Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy on Irish Farmers’ Off‐farm Labour Market Participation Decisions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 41-56, February.
    3. Andrius Kazukauskas & Carol Newman & Johannes Sauer, 2014. "The impact of decoupled subsidies on productivity in agriculture: a cross-country analysis using microdata," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 327-336, May.
    4. Devadoss, Stephen & Gibson, Mark J. & Luckstead, Jeff, 2016. "The Impact of Agricultural Subsidies on the Corn Market with Farm Heterogeneity and Endogenous Entry and Exit," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Frýd, Lukáš & Sokol, Ondřej, 2021. "Relationships between technical efficiency and subsidies for Czech farms: A two-stage robust approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Vyn, Richard J. & Haq, Zahoor Ul & Weerahewa, Jeevika & Meilke, Karl D., 2012. "The Influence of Market Returns and Government Payments on Canadian Farmland Values," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Ashok Kumar Mishra & Krishna Paudel, 2011. "Estimating permanent income and wealth of the US farm households," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(12), pages 1521-1533.
    8. Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs & Johan Swinnen, 2010. "EU Land Markets and the Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-31.
    9. Whitaker, James B. & Effland, Anne, 2009. "Income Stabilization Through Government Payments: How is Farm Household Consumption Affected?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 36-48, April.
    10. Thia Hennessy & Tahir Rehman, 2006. "Modelling the Impact of Decoupling on Structural Change in the Farming Sector: integrating econometric and optimisation models," Working Papers 0601, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    11. Donnellan, Trevor & Hennessy, Thia, 2012. "Defining a theoretical model of farm households’ labour allocation decisions," Factor Markets Working Papers 140, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    12. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jo Swinnen, 2008. "Static and Dynamic Distributional Effects of Decoupled Payments," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 20-47.
    13. Balkhausen, Oliver & Banse, Martin & Grethe, Harald & Nolte, Stephan, 2005. "Modellierung der Auswirkungen einer Entkopplung der Direktzahlungen in der EU auf die Flächenallokation und Wiederkäuerproduktion: Eine Analyse unterschiedlicher Modellergebnisse," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 54(08), pages 1-15.
    14. D’Antoni, Jeremy M. & Mishra, Ashok K. & Barkley, Andrew P., 2012. "Feast or flee: Government payments and labor migration from U.S. agriculture," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 181-192.
    15. Mark, Tyler B. & Detre, Joshua & D'Antoni, Jeremy & Mishra, Ashok, 2012. "Factors Influencing Farm Operator Expectations on Future Levels of Government Support," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2012, pages 1-17.
    16. Daniel May, 2011. "Agricultural trade liberalization under bilateralism: an international network perspective," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 10(1), pages 23-34, April.
    17. D'Antoni, Jeremy M. & Mishra, Ashok K. & Joo, Hyunjeong, 2012. "Welfare Implications of a Reduction in Government Payments: The Role of Fringe Benefits," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124766, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Oliver Balkhausen & Martin Banse & Harald Grethe, 2008. "Modelling CAP Decoupling in the EU: A Comparison of Selected Simulation Models and Results," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 57-71, February.
    19. Donnellan, Trevor & Hennessy, Thia C., 2012. "The Labour Allocation Decisions of Farm Households: Defining a theoretical model," Working papers 137021, Factor Markets, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    20. Yang Zou & Qingbin Wang, 2012. "Impacts of direct government payments on US agriculture: evidence from 1960‐2010 data," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(2), pages 188-199, May.

    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:eaae89:239279. 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/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.