EuroChoices最新文献

{"title":"The War in Ukraine and Climate Change Issues Continue to Dominate the Economic, Social and Political Agenda\u0000 Der Krieg in Ukraine und Fragen des Klimawandels beherrscht weiterhin die wirtschaftliche, soziale and politische Agenda\u0000 La guerre en Ukraine et changement climatique continuent de dominer l'agenda economique, social et politique","authors":"John Davis","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12428","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12428","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140559694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Optimising Precision Agriculture Choices for Arable Farmers in Germany and the UK: the LINKDAPA Approach","authors":"Tamisan Latherow, Matthieu Arnoult, Thomas Engel, Renke Gralfs, Oksana Hrynevych, Maria Karampoiki, Salar Mahmood, Alistair Murdoch, Dimitrios Paraforos, Emanuelle Ranieri, Lindsay Todman, Richard Tranter, John Hammond","doi":"10.1111/1746-692x.12426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692x.12426","url":null,"abstract":"SummaryFarmer adoption of so‐called Precision Agriculture (PA) or ‘smart’ technologies in the arable sector has grown in the last few decades with a focus on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) and variable rate technologies (VRT). This has led to increased generation of large volumes of data about fields and their crop yields which could be used to increase the environmental and financial performance for farmers. However, survey results show that cost and adaptability have been issues for many farmers in the UK and Germany that have held back such adoption. The LINKDAPA (LINKing multi‐source Data for Adoption of Precision Agriculture) project's approach sought to minimise both concerns by creating a customisable web platform that incorporates both GNSS and VRT into one, easy to use, affordable option for farmers. The project developed an online cloud‐based decision support tool which takes into account different fertiliser strategies based on novel algorithms using soil, historic yield and satellite data. Co‐created by researchers, farmers and agricultural technology firms, the LINKDAPA approach offers both economical and easy to implement solutions for farm management to mitigate resource loss‐ratios such as in fertiliser use, provide financial performance analyses, and multi‐year graphical imagery for soil mapping.","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140598031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Climate Change Mitigation in Agriculture beyond 2030: Options for Carbon Pricing and Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms\u0000 Atténuation du changement climatique dans l'agriculture après 2030 : options pour la tarification du carbone et les mécanismes d'ajustement aux frontières\u0000 Klimaschutz in der Landwirtschaft nach 2030: Optionen für Carbon-Bepreisung und Carbon-Obergrenzen","authors":"Alisa Spiegel,&nbsp;Claudia Heidecke,&nbsp;Julio G. Fournier Gabela,&nbsp;Davit Stepanyan,&nbsp;Mareike Söder,&nbsp;Florian Freund,&nbsp;Alexander Gocht,&nbsp;Martin Banse,&nbsp;Bernhard Osterburg","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12425","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12425","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the EU's climate policy, agriculture is covered as an Effort-Sharing (ESR) sector, i.e. a sector beyond the Emission Trading System and LULUCF. Despite ambitious climate targets for the ESR sectors and an emerging focus on the need for agriculture to make a substantial contribution to climate change mitigation, agriculture has contributed much less to achieving climate targets than other ESR sectors in most EU Member States. A more radical mitigation instrument is required since the potential to increase climate efficiency in EU agriculture is limited. Carbon pricing is considered an effective instrument and is widely adopted in other sectors worldwide. Options on how to reduce related carbon leakage are discussed. Our recommendations for efficient climate change mitigation policy in agriculture are threefold. First, the agricultural sector needs more precise guidance and clear climate targets. Second, although preventing all conflicts between climate change mitigation actions and other policy goals is impossible and inefficient, a policy could minimise adverse effects. Third, since agricultural GHG emissions can only be minimised and compensated by negative emissions in other sectors, well-defined intersectoral coordination is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"19-27"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1746-692X.12425","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140201850","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Modelling in Support of Better Agricultural and Food Policies: the JRC's Integrated Agro-economic Modelling platform (iMAP)\u0000 Modélisation à l'appui de meilleures politiques agricoles et alimentaires : la plateforme de modélisation agroéconomique intégrée (iMAP) du Centre commun de recherche (JRC)\u0000 Modellierung zur Unterstützung einer besseren Agrar- und Ernährungspolitik: die Plattform für integrierte agrarökonomische Modellierung (iMAP) des JRC","authors":"Jesus Barreiro-Hurle,&nbsp;Thomas Fellmann,&nbsp;Robert M'barek","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12421","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12421","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research in the area of agro-economic modelling has been one of the key contributions of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) to the development of better agri-food policies in the EU. This article provides an overview of the development of the JRC's integrated agro-economic modelling platform since its establishment in 2005. We highlight the main contributions to policy analysis and describe in detail two key areas, namely the provision of medium-term projections for agricultural markets and the analysis of various CAP proposals. Furthermore, we describe the gradual shift to expand the capabilities of individual models within the platform to encompass aspects beyond traditional agro-economic aspects and incorporate environmental considerations. Model integration remains a focus both within the platform at different levels and scales, and in conjunction with biophysical models. This, together with incorporating knowledge from other fields of economic analysis is fundamental to capture changing policy objectives.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"43-53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1746-692X.12421","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140070232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Approach Choices for Antimicrobial Use Reduction in European Food Animal Production\u0000 Approches alternatives pour la réduction de l'utilisation des antimicrobiens dans la production animale européenne destinée à l'alimentation\u0000 Lösungsansätze zur Reduzierung des Einsatzes antimikrobieller Mittel in der europäischen Nutztierhaltung","authors":"Ziping Wu","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12424","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12424","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;La réduction de l'utilisation des antimicrobiens (UAM) constitue une stratégie mondiale essentielle dans la lutte contre la résistance aux antimicrobiens (RAM) dans le domaine de la production animale destinée à l'alimentation. Nous avons procédé à un examen approfondi des approches distinctes utilisées dans la gestion de la réduction de l'UAM au Royaume-Uni, au Danemark et aux Pays-Bas. Notre analyse s'est penchée sur les processus de réforme, en mettant l'accent sur les rôles joués par les pouvoirs publics, le grand public et les principales parties prenantes tout au long de la chaîne d'approvisionnement. De plus, nous avons examiné les impacts de ces approches sur l'UAM, la RAM et le paysage économique de la production animale destinée à l'alimentation. Dans les trois pays, ces réformes ont été ancrées dans la réduction et l'utilisation judicieuse des antimicrobiens d'importance critique (AIC) à usage vétérinaire. Ces efforts ont donné des résultats significatifs, notamment en matière de réduction du recours aux AIC. En utilisant une approche volontaire de réduction de l'UAM, la participation active des organismes publics, des consommateurs et des chefs de file de la chaîne d'approvisionnement, notamment les supermarchés, s'est avérée essentielle. En termes de mise en oeuvre, ces pays ont adopté diverses stratégies de gestion, notamment des approches volontaires, réglementaires et hybrides, défendues respectivement par les agriculteurs, les agences gouvernementales et les vétérinaires. Ces approches ont produit des impacts divers, à la fois en termes de potentiel de réduction et d'influence sur les performances agricoles.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Die Reduzierung des Einsatzes antimikrobieller Mittel ist eine zentrale globale Strategie zur Bekämpfung der Antibiotikaresistenz im Bereich der Nutzierhaltung. Wir haben eine umfassende Untersuchung der verschiedenen Ansätze zur Reduzierung des Antibiotikaeinsatzes im Vereinigten Königreich, in Dänemark und in den Niederlanden durchgeführt. Unsere Analyse befasste sich mit den Reformprozessen, wobei die Rolle der Regierung, der Öffentlichkeit und der wichtigsten Interessengruppen in der gesamten Lieferkette hervorgehoben wurde. Darüber hinaus untersuchten wir die Auswirkungen dieser Reduzierungsansätze auf den Einsatz antimikrobieller Mittel, Antibiotikaresistenzen und das wirtschaftliche Umfeld der Nutztierproduktion. In allen drei Ländern ist die Reduzierung und der vernünftige Einsatz von kritisch wichtigen antimikrobiellen Mitteln für die Veterinärmedizin in den Reformen verankert. Diese Bemühungen haben zu bedeutenden Ergebnissen geführt, insbesondere in der Verringerung des Einsatzes von wichtigen antimikrobiellen Mitteln. Bei der Anwendung eines freiwilligen Ansatzes zur Verringerung des Einsatzes von antimikrobiellen Mitteln hat sich die aktive Beteiligung von Regierungsstellen, Verbrauchern und führenden Unternehmen der Lieferkette, insbesondere von Supermärkten, als entscheidend erwiesen. Was die Umsetzung","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"36-42"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140019402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hotspots in the EU-27 and Economic Consequences of the 2022 Spring-Summer Drought\u0000 Points chauds dans l'Union européenne à 27 et conséquences économiques de la sécheresse du printemps-été 2022\u0000 Die wirtschaftlichen Folgen der Dürre im Frühjahr und Sommer 2022 und ihre Hotspots in der EU-27","authors":"Zsolt Pinke,&nbsp;Tamás Ács,&nbsp;Péter Kalicz,&nbsp;Zoltán Kern,&nbsp;Attila Jambor","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12423","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12423","url":null,"abstract":"<p>L'année 2022 restera dans les mémoires comme une année de grave sécheresse en Europe. Pour les six cultures représentant la plus grande superficie récoltée, les pertes de production causées par la sécheresse pourraient même avoir atteint une valeur estimée à 13 milliards d'euros dans l'Union européenne à 27. Compte tenu de la part de ces grandes cultures dans l'ensemble des superficies récoltées, la perte totale sur l'ensemble des terres cultivées pourrait avoir atteint deux fois ce montant (25 à 30 millions d'euros). Ce chiffre indique l'ampleur du défi que représente le changement climatique sur le continent. Alors que la majeure partie de l'Europe a souffert d'une grave sécheresse au printemps et à l’été 2022, les pertes agricoles étaient spécifiques à chaque région et se sont concentrées dans les régions de la Méditerranée occidentale et des Carpates-Balkans. Les cultures de maïs et de tournesol ont subi les pertes les plus importantes, tandis que les données concernant le blé, l'orge, le colza et le seigle ont montré un tableau ambivalent. Les pertes de production pour les cultures arables,associées aux prix extrêmement élevés du marché, ont même représenté 1 à 2 pour cent du PIB dans certains pays de la région des Carpates et des Balkans. Le paradoxe de l'an dernier est que, malgré la sévérité de l'impact de la sécheresse sur les cultures arables, l'agriculture de l'Union européenne a créé une valeur ajoutée brute très élevée grâce à la flambée des prix alimentaires.</p><p>Das Jahr 2022 wird in Europa als schweres Dürrejahr in Erinnerung bleiben. Die Produktionsverluste bei den sechs Kulturen mit der größten Erntefläche in der EU-27 dürften sich auf bis zu 13 Milliarden Euro belaufen haben und die Gesamtverluste für den Ackerbau könnten sogar doppelt so hoch gewesen sein. Dieser hohe wirtschaftliche Schaden zeigt, wie groß die Herausforderung ist, die der Klimawandel für den Kontinent darstellt. Obwohl der größte Teil Europas im Frühjahr und Sommer 2022 unter schwerer Trockenheit litt, waren die landwirtschaftlichen Verluste regionsspezifisch und konzentrierten sich auf den westlichen Mittelmeerraum und die Karpaten-Balkan-Region. Mais und Sonnenblumen erlitten die höchsten Verluste, während die Daten für Weizen, Gerste, Raps und Roggen ein ambivalentes Bild zeigten. Die Dürreschäden in Verbindung mit den extrem hohen Marktpreisen erreichten in einigen Ländern der Karpaten-Balkan-Region 1-2 Prozent des BIP. Das Paradoxe daran ist, dass die Landwirtschaft in der Europäischen Union trotz der durch die Dürre verursachten Verluste eine sehr hohe Bruttowertschöpfung erwirtschaftet hat, was auf die stark gestiegenen Lebensmittelpreise zurückzuführen ist.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"28-33"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139922631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Compensating for the Indirect Effects of the Russian Invasion of Ukraine – Varied approaches from Bulgaria, Poland and Romania\u0000 Compenser les effets indirects de l'invasion de l'Ukraine par la Russie – Approches variées en Bulgarie, en Pologne et en Roumanie\u0000 Entschädigungen für die indirekten Auswirkungen des russischen Einmarschs in die Ukraine: abwechslungsreiche Ansätze aus Bulgarien, Polen und Rumänien","authors":"Rositsa Beluhova-Uzunova,&nbsp;Stefan Mann,&nbsp;Maria Prisacariu,&nbsp;Adrian Sadłowski","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12422","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12422","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Après l'invasion de l'Ukraine par la Russie, l'Union européenne (UE) a levé les droits de douane sur les importations de produits ukrainiens afin de maintenir les exportations ukrainiennes sur le marché mondial. Cela a entraîné une baisse considérable des prix des céréales et des graines oléagineuses dans les États membres concernés. La Commission européenne a alloué 56 millions d'euros aux agriculteurs de Bulgarie, de Pologne et de Roumanie en compensation des pertes causées par cette ouverture du marché communautaire. Ce montant a été complété par 56 millions d'euros supplémentaires provenant des budgets nationaux. L'ensemble étant insuffisant pour compenser pleinement les pertes des agriculteurs, les trois États membres ont dû définir des critères sélectifs pour décider de la répartition des fonds. La Bulgarie a opté pour des paiements compensatoires basés sur la superficie pour les producteurs de tournesol. La Roumanie a choisi de soutenir les agriculteurs stockant du blé, excluant ainsi les petits producteurs ne disposant pas d'installations de stockage. La Pologne a indemnisé un large éventail de producteurs agricoles, mais a réduit le montant versé aux plus grandes exploitations. Une comparaison de ces trois approches constitue un bon exemple concret pour démontrer l'interaction entre les secours d'urgence et les priorités politiques des pouvoirs publics nationaux.</p><p>Nach dem russischen Einmarsch in die Ukraine hob die Europäische Union (EU) die Importzölle für ukrainische Waren auf, um ukrainische Exporte auf den Weltmarkt weiter zu ermöglichen. Dies führte zu einem spürbaren Preisverfall von Getreide und Ölsaaten in den betroffenen Mitgliedsländern. Die Europäische Kommission allozierte 56 Millionen Euro für Landwirte in Bulgarien, Polen und Rumänien, um für durch die Grenzöffnung der EU entstehende Verluste zu entschädigen. Diese Mittel wurden durch 56 Millionen Euros aus den nationalen Haushalten ergänzt. Da dies nicht ausreichte, die Landwirte vollumfänglich für ihre Verluste zu entschädigen, mussten die drei Mitgliedsstaaten für die Zuweisung der Gelder selektive Kriterien definieren. Bulgarien entschied sich für hektarbasierte Kompensationszahlungen für Sonnenblumenproduzenten, und Rumänien entschied sich, Zuschüsse an Landwirte zu zahlen, die Weizen lagern, und damit Kleinbauern ohne Lagermöglichkeiten von der Förderung auszuschliessen. Polen kompensierte eine Reihe von Kulturen, aber beschränkte die Auszahlungssumme an Grossbetriebe. Ein Vergleich dieser drei Ansätze ist ein gutes Beispiel für die Verquickung zwischen Nothilfe und den politischen Prioritäten nationaler Regierungen.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"11-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139752795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Farmers' Perceptions of Obstacles to Business Development\u0000 Perceptions des agriculteurs quant aux obstacles au développement des entreprises\u0000 Hindernisse in der Unternehmensentwicklung und ihre Wahrnehmung in der Landwirtschaft","authors":"Lotte Yanore PhD candidate,&nbsp;Jaap Sok,&nbsp;Alfons Oude Lansink","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12420","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12420","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article examines perceived obstacles to business development of Dutch dairy farmers and compares them to Dutch broiler farmers and Swedish farmers. Understanding farmers' perceived obstacles is crucial for developing effective policies to support sustainable and resilient farms. Data were collected using a survey and analysed using factor and regression analysis. The study finds that rules and regulations are the most significant obstacle for all three groups of farmers. Dutch dairy farmers also face challenges related to land availability, permits and leasing, while Dutch broiler farmers have concerns mostly about foreign competition. Financial obstacles are significant but considered less important than regulatory and land-related challenges. Farm characteristics, such as intensity of operation, off-farm income, location, succession status and farmer's patience were statistically related to the perceived obstacles of Dutch dairy farmers. The associations found suggest that dairy farmers operating their businesses more intensively face more financial, social capital and land availability obstacles. It was also found that younger farmers or farmers with successors score higher on perceived obstacles concerning policy and land availability. Recommendations include improving information provision, simplifying regulations, and engaging stakeholders to reduce policy obstacles. Also, policies should consider farmers' unique needs and should be implemented in a decentralised way.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"56-62"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1746-692X.12420","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139752794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Rapid Development of Bioeconomy Policies in the EU and other Regions of the World\u0000 Le développement rapide des politiques de la bioéconomie dans l'Union européenne et d'autres régions du monde\u0000 Die rasante Entwicklung der Bioökonomie Richtlinien in der EU und anderen Regionen der Welt","authors":"Robert M'barek,&nbsp;Justus Wesseler","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12415","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12415","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the European Union, the bioeconomy is very broadly defined, encompassing all sectors and associated services and investments that produce, use, process, distribute or consume biological resources, including ecosystem services. It is seen as a natural enabler and result of the transformation proposed by Europe's sustainable growth strategy, the Green Deal. EU Member States and regions also have strategies to further target the implementation of the bioeconomy. The bioeconomy and its related policies have shown a rapid development in the EU and other regions of the world. In challenging times, the sustainable and circular bioeconomy is a central element in supporting the transition to an economy that is climate-neutral, while preserving the biosphere. From the global agenda of United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), climate change and biodiversity, several other international organisations, global fora, and private initiatives, all provide knowledge, analyses and perspectives for the bioeconomy. Africa's bioeconomy has a huge potential as a catalyser for advancing towards many SDGs. In North America, the US has recently defined bold goals for biotechnology and biomanufacturing. South American countries foster their enormous agricultural and forestry potential in supporting the bioeconomy, while playing a key role for global climate and biodiversity.</p><p>The bioeconomy in its different designs is thus an important building block for the global transformation towards a more sustainable economic system.</p>","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"22 3","pages":"5-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1746-692X.12415","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139024589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Who (Really) Benefits from the Complementary Redistributive Income Support?\u0000 Qui bénéficie (vraiment) de l'aide redistributive complémentaire au revenu ? \u0000 Wer profitiert (wirklich) von der Ergänzende Umverteilungseinkommensstützung?","authors":"Catherine Laroche-Dupraz,&nbsp;Stéphane Lemarié,&nbsp;Laurent Piet","doi":"10.1111/1746-692X.12418","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1746-692X.12418","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;The 2013 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) introduced the redistributive payment as an optional scheme to redistribute direct support between farmers by granting them an additional payment for the first hectares up to a threshold. In 2021, only 15 per cent of the direct payments went to more than 75 per cent of European farms (European Commission, 2021). The 2023 CAP reform made this scheme compulsory under the name of the Complementary Redistributive Income Support (CRIS). Under CRIS, a farmer receives Basic Income Support (BIS) plus CRIS for each hectare of their farm up to a certain threshold, and then only BIS for the hectares above the threshold, irrespective of any other supports to which they may be eligible (Regulation 2021/2115, Article 29). Member States are free to decide the per hectare amounts of CRIS and BIS and the threshold level below which CRIS is granted. They can also define different amounts of CRIS for different ranges of farm area sizes, and set all these parameters at national or regional level. With some exceptions, Member States must devote at least 10 per cent of their first pillar direct payments on implementing CRIS, which reduces the budget available for BIS accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;An analysis of the financial annexes of the national CAP strategic plans shows that, of the 25 Member States implementing CRIS (Malta and Denmark have obtained a derogation), 18 have planned to spend this 10 per cent minimum or more in 2017 (Figure 1), four of them reaching 20 per cent or more. The share of hectares concerned is much more varied: with the same 10 per cent budget, Portugal (PT) will cover 19 per cent of its total supported area while Austria (AT) will cover 68 per cent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As intended, CRIS leads to redistribution of part of the payments from larger to smaller farms. However, the farm size up to which farmers actually benefit from the policy is not apparent from the scheme parameters and may be well above the CRIS threshold. Take the example of Czechia's strategic plan (Figure 2). In 2027, a 200 ha Czech farm will receive a total of 36,300 € (green line), with 13,200 € coming from BIS (66 €/ha on every hectare; blue line), and 23,100 € coming from CRIS (154 €/ha up to 150 ha; yellow line).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Instead, if the same total budget were to be distributed only through a uniform payment per hectare, the same farm would receive a total of 24,000 € (120 €/ha on every hectare; red line). A comparison of the green and red lines shows that farms with a size equal to the CRIS threshold benefit most from the redistribution. However, in Czechia, even farms of up to 430 ha should benefit from CRIS, which is almost three times larger than the 150 ha threshold.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Figure 3 reports the results of similar calculations for the 25 Member States implementing CRIS, together with their 2020 average farm area. While the maximum area of beneficiary farms is always higher than the CRIS threshold by construction, it is also higher th","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":"23 1","pages":"34-35"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1746-692X.12418","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138546664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}