The common agricultural policy and food security


Published on

Lecture of 14-11-2012 on the Common Agricultural Policy and Food Security. Course: European Institutions and Policies. Public Administration and Policy Group, Wageningen University (NL)

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Last lecture: food safety, this time other aspect food: agriculture and food security
  • Discourses: how to study the CAP? Manier die ikzelfuitermateinteressantvind is focus op discourse, artikelbla en bla
  • Framing: example Hamas
  • The common agricultural policy and food security

    1. 1. The Common Agricultural Policy and FoodSecurityEuropean Union Institutions and Policies, PAP-5330614th of November 2012, Jeroen CandelPublic Administration and Policy Group
    2. 2. A small quiz (1)How much does the EU spend on the CAP?A) 20% of its budget (27,5 billion euro per year)B) 40% of its budget (55 billion euro per year)C) 60% of its budget (82,5 billion euro per year)
    3. 3. A small quiz (2)Who‟s the European commissioner for agriculture?A) Dacian CiolosB) Mariann Fischer BoelC) José Graziano da Silva
    4. 4. A small quiz (3)Which country gets the most money?A)FranceB)GermanyC)Poland
    5. 5. What is the CAP? What do you know about the CAP? EU‟s main agricultural steering device Almost half (40%) of the EU Budget: 55 billion Euro per year Surrounded by controversy
    6. 6. Today‟s lecture History (article Lynggaard & Nedergaard) Controversies The CAP towards 2020 Food security (article Zahrnt)
    7. 7. Early years In effect as of 1962 Food security Common market Secured income farmers Stimulating innovation Pioneer role Sicco Mansholt
    8. 8. 70s and 80s: crisis CAP big success, too big..: Costs High prices for consumers Environment Overproduction Pressure WTO 1984: Quota, but insufficient: increasing pressure
    9. 9. Reforms 1992 MacSharry Reform: direct income support Agenda 2000: rural development (second pillar) 2003 Fischler Reform: decoupling, cross- compliance, mulftifunctionality 2013 Ciolos Reform?
    10. 10. How to explain these policy developments?Lynggaard & Nedergaard (2009): Look at both preferences (ideas) and institutions (interests) Shift toward post-materialist preferences Agricultural interests still most powerful Importance of periods in between reforms
    11. 11. Changes in preferences and institutions (1)
    12. 12. Changes in preferences and institutions (2)
    13. 13. Changes in preferences and institutions (3)
    14. 14. 50 years of CAP
    15. 15. Controversies1. Size of the total budget2. Distribution of the budget3. Requirements for farmers4. External effects
    16. 16. Source: EuropeanCommission
    17. 17. Dacian Ciolos on the future of the CAP
    18. 18. What are the aims of the „new‟ CAP? Food security Quality, value and diversity of food Local employment
    19. 19. Food security (1)To preserve the food production potential on asustainable basis throughout the EU, so as toguarantee long-term food security for Europeancitizens and to contribute to growing world fooddemand, expected by FAO to increase by 70% by2050. Recent incidents of increased marketinstability, often exacerbated by climatechange, further highlight these trends and pressures.Europes capacity to deliver food security is animportant long term choice for Europe which cannotbe taken for granted.
    20. 20. Food security (2) Traditionally issue development policies (e.g. Food security thematic programme) But back on EU agricultural policy agenda (!) How come? Are these concerns justified?
    21. 21. Context: 2008 Food price crisis
    22. 22. Should food security be the CAP‟s primaryaim? What do you think?
    23. 23. Zahrnt‟s responseYes, fears are rising, but: Food production p/c constantly increased Food is relatively inexpensive EU production could, in real crisis, be increased Farm income and market support irrelevant for EU & inefficient for global FS Invest in research and infrastructure dev. countries
    24. 24. “There are a number of threats out there about which wecannot have absolute certainty: attacks by Martians, killermummies from the Pyramids and dinosaurs escaping fromJurassic Parks. Serious policy makers have to analyze andweigh these risks. Food security does not pass the test;there is no reasonably discernible threat during the comingdecades.” (Zahrnt, 2011: 16)
    25. 25. Why then, are we still using the term? It resonates No one can be against it It provides legitimization A discursive weapon for all
    26. 26. Food security: different meanings
    27. 27. Different food security frames Framing: sense-making, interpreting, giving meaning to social phenomena Food security on the rise, but frames differ Long term vs. short term food security Global vs. domestic/ regional food security Producer oriented vs. consumer oriented  A diffused debate
    28. 28. What are the hot potatoes in the currentnegotiations? It‟s not food security Size budget Greening measures 7500 amendments European Parliament How to make rules that are both flexible and strict?
    29. 29. Position of The Netherlands Netherlands agree with redistribution (-8%) 30% of income support coupled to greening But flexible greening measures! Groups of farmers/ collectives
    30. 30. Want to know more about the CAP? Commission website CAP Videoblog „De slag om Brussel‟, Dutch tv series about EU politics. Episode of 12 November was about the CAP and EU soy imports. Twitter: @ToekomstGLB (NL) @ARC2020eu (EN) @FoodPoliticsEU (EN) @xAlan_Matthews (EN)
    31. 31. Thank you for your kind attention! Any questions? Twitter: @JeroenWUR