记忆深处:经济分析是否影响了CAP改革?

IF 2.4 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
T. Haniotis
{"title":"记忆深处:经济分析是否影响了CAP改革?","authors":"T. Haniotis","doi":"10.1111/1746-692x.12401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article elaborates the role of economic analysis in influencing the reform path of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) between 1992 and 2022 on the basis of publicly available information from a personal career experience in the European Commission. Analyses about the trade distorting impact of the pre‐1992 CAP were dominant in influencing the internal Commission debate before the Uruguay Agreement on Agriculture, and were mostly external from academia and international organisations. Developments leading to the Fischler reform in 2003 led to the broadening of analytical scope to cover the impact of food safety issues on market developments, non‐tariff barriers to trade, or alternative scenarios about an enlarged EU based on the increasing use of internal and external models. Evaluations and Impact Assessments played a major role in assessing options for CAP reforms after 2007, with the increasing role of NGOs and think tanks gradually shifting the analytical and policy focus in identifying CAP weaknesses in its environmental delivery. The new institutional reality of co‐decision complicated the link between analysis and policy decision making. However, though economic analysis is clearly not sufficient, it is still necessary and essential to jointly address the twin challenges of food security and climate change.","PeriodicalId":44823,"journal":{"name":"EuroChoices","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Down (my) Memory Lane: Has Economic Analysis Impacted CAP Reforms?\",\"authors\":\"T. Haniotis\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1746-692x.12401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article elaborates the role of economic analysis in influencing the reform path of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) between 1992 and 2022 on the basis of publicly available information from a personal career experience in the European Commission. Analyses about the trade distorting impact of the pre‐1992 CAP were dominant in influencing the internal Commission debate before the Uruguay Agreement on Agriculture, and were mostly external from academia and international organisations. Developments leading to the Fischler reform in 2003 led to the broadening of analytical scope to cover the impact of food safety issues on market developments, non‐tariff barriers to trade, or alternative scenarios about an enlarged EU based on the increasing use of internal and external models. Evaluations and Impact Assessments played a major role in assessing options for CAP reforms after 2007, with the increasing role of NGOs and think tanks gradually shifting the analytical and policy focus in identifying CAP weaknesses in its environmental delivery. The new institutional reality of co‐decision complicated the link between analysis and policy decision making. However, though economic analysis is clearly not sufficient, it is still necessary and essential to jointly address the twin challenges of food security and climate change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EuroChoices\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EuroChoices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692x.12401\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EuroChoices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692x.12401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文根据个人在欧盟委员会的职业经历中公开的信息,阐述了经济分析在影响1992年至2022年共同农业政策(CAP)改革道路方面的作用。关于1992年前CAP扭曲贸易影响的分析在《乌拉圭农业协定》之前的委员会内部辩论中占主导地位,并且大多来自学术界和国际组织。2003年Fischler改革的发展扩大了分析范围,涵盖了食品安全问题对市场发展的影响、非关税贸易壁垒,或基于越来越多地使用内部和外部模型扩大欧盟的替代方案。评价和影响评估在评估2007年后履约协助方案改革的备选方案方面发挥了重要作用,非政府组织和智囊团的作用越来越大,逐渐将分析和政策重点转移到确定履约协助方案在环境交付方面的弱点上。共同决策的新制度现实使分析和政策决策之间的联系变得复杂。然而,尽管经济分析显然不够,但联合应对粮食安全和气候变化这两大挑战仍然是必要和必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Down (my) Memory Lane: Has Economic Analysis Impacted CAP Reforms?
This article elaborates the role of economic analysis in influencing the reform path of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) between 1992 and 2022 on the basis of publicly available information from a personal career experience in the European Commission. Analyses about the trade distorting impact of the pre‐1992 CAP were dominant in influencing the internal Commission debate before the Uruguay Agreement on Agriculture, and were mostly external from academia and international organisations. Developments leading to the Fischler reform in 2003 led to the broadening of analytical scope to cover the impact of food safety issues on market developments, non‐tariff barriers to trade, or alternative scenarios about an enlarged EU based on the increasing use of internal and external models. Evaluations and Impact Assessments played a major role in assessing options for CAP reforms after 2007, with the increasing role of NGOs and think tanks gradually shifting the analytical and policy focus in identifying CAP weaknesses in its environmental delivery. The new institutional reality of co‐decision complicated the link between analysis and policy decision making. However, though economic analysis is clearly not sufficient, it is still necessary and essential to jointly address the twin challenges of food security and climate change.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
EuroChoices
EuroChoices AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: EuroChoices is a full colour, peer reviewed, outreach journal of topical European agri-food and rural resource issues, published three times a year in April, August and December. Its main aim is to bring current research and policy deliberations on agri-food and rural resource issues to a wide readership, both technical & non-technical. The need for this is clear - there are great changes afoot in the European and global agri-food industries and rural areas, which are of enormous impact and concern to society. The issues which underlie present deliberations in the policy and private sectors are complex and, until now, normally expressed in impenetrable technical language.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信