IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Will the EU Single Area Payment decrease farm efficiency in the New Member States?


  • Douarin, Elodie
  • Latruffe, Laure


This paper starts the debate regarding the likely impact of post-accession public support in the New Member States on their farming sector’s efficiency. While one aim of farm support in the European Union (EU) is to promote efficient farms that can compete internationally, a higher level of support via the Single Area Payment (SAP) may have adverse effects on farms’ performance. Analyses using pre-accession technical efficiency scores calculated with Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and post-accession farmer’s intentions, lead to the conclusion that the implementation of the SAP may decrease farm efficiency. The main reasons are the negative link between farm efficiency and subsidies already present in pre-EU accession Lithuania, and the change in incentives given to less efficient farms by the introduction of SAP.

Suggested Citation

  • Douarin, Elodie & Latruffe, Laure, 2009. "Will the EU Single Area Payment decrease farm efficiency in the New Member States?," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51625, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae09:51625

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. David A. Hennessy, 1998. "The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 46-57.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini & Paolo Sckokai, 1994. "Efficiency of Decoupled Farm Programs Under Distortionary Taxation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 362-370.
    3. Sarris, Alexander H & Doucha, Tomas & Mathijs, Erik, 1999. "Agricultural Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe: Implications for Competitiveness and Rural Development," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 305-329, August.
    4. Kittelsen, Sverre A.C. & Magnussen, Jon, 2009. "Testing DEA Models of Efficiency in Norwegian Psychiatric Outpatient Clinics," HERO On line Working Paper Series 1999:4, Oslo University, Health Economics Research Programme.
    5. Zhu, Xueqin & Demeter, Robert Milan & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M., 2008. "Competitiveness of dairy farms in three countries: the role of CAP subsidies," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44143, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. James Rude, 2000. "An Examination of Nearly Green Programs: Case Study for Canada," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 755-761.
    7. Laure Latruffe & Hervé Guyomard & Chantal Le Mouël, 2009. "The role of public subsidies on farms’ managerial efficiency: An application of a five-stage approach to France," Working Papers SMART - LERECO 09-05, INRA UMR SMART-LERECO.
    8. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José M. Gil, 2008. "Farms' technical inefficiencies in the presence of government programs ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(1), pages 57-76, March.
    9. Kelvin Balcombe & Iain Fraser & Laure Latruffe & Mizanur Rahman & Laurence Smith, 2008. "An application of the DEA double bootstrap to examine sources of efficiency in Bangladesh rice farming," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(15), pages 1919-1925.
    10. C. Edwin Young & Paul C. Westcott, 2000. "How Decoupled Is U.S. Agricultural Support for Major Crops?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 762-767.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Single Area Payment; technical efficiency; size; subsidies; Lithuania; Agricultural and Food Policy; Productivity Analysis; D24; Q12;

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets


    Access and download statistics


    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:iaae09:51625. 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: .

    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 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.

    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.