共同农业政策与欧盟预算:停滞还是改变?

Q3 Social Sciences
Alan Greer
{"title":"共同农业政策与欧盟预算:停滞还是改变?","authors":"Alan Greer","doi":"10.17979/EJGE.2013.2.2.4291","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After highlighting the budgetary context and the historical trends on the funding of the CAP, this paper considers contemporary debates about its reform in the context of two ‘historic firsts’. Negotiations about the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2014-20 for the first time took place in tandem with a proposed CAP reform, within the broader context set by the financial crisis after 2008. Second, the CAP reform debates took place within the new institutional arrangements introduced in the Lisbon Treaty, which by extending the co-decision mechanism to the CAP potentially has increased the influence of the European Parliament (EP). Indeed the CAP reform dossiers were the first real test of these new arrangements and provide an insight into how the new institutional structure will work in practice. In both cases the paper highlights a continuing cleavage among member states and stakeholder interests - that maps partly onto a broader budgetary gainers/losers division - between advocates of radical reform (e.g. the UK, Sweden) and those who favour the retention of the traditional CAP (such as France, Spain and Ireland).","PeriodicalId":37945,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Government and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Common Agricultural Policy and the EU budget: stasis or change?\",\"authors\":\"Alan Greer\",\"doi\":\"10.17979/EJGE.2013.2.2.4291\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After highlighting the budgetary context and the historical trends on the funding of the CAP, this paper considers contemporary debates about its reform in the context of two ‘historic firsts’. Negotiations about the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2014-20 for the first time took place in tandem with a proposed CAP reform, within the broader context set by the financial crisis after 2008. Second, the CAP reform debates took place within the new institutional arrangements introduced in the Lisbon Treaty, which by extending the co-decision mechanism to the CAP potentially has increased the influence of the European Parliament (EP). Indeed the CAP reform dossiers were the first real test of these new arrangements and provide an insight into how the new institutional structure will work in practice. In both cases the paper highlights a continuing cleavage among member states and stakeholder interests - that maps partly onto a broader budgetary gainers/losers division - between advocates of radical reform (e.g. the UK, Sweden) and those who favour the retention of the traditional CAP (such as France, Spain and Ireland).\",\"PeriodicalId\":37945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Government and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Government and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17979/EJGE.2013.2.2.4291\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Government and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17979/EJGE.2013.2.2.4291","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

在强调了预算背景和CAP资金的历史趋势之后,本文在两个“历史第一”的背景下考虑了当代关于其改革的辩论。在2008年后金融危机的大背景下,关于2014- 2020年多年度金融框架(MFF)的谈判首次与拟议的CAP改革同时进行。其次,共同农业政策改革的辩论是在《里斯本条约》引入的新制度安排范围内进行的,通过将共同决策机制扩展到共同农业政策,这可能会增加欧洲议会(EP)的影响力。事实上,共同农业政策改革档案是对这些新安排的第一次真正考验,并提供了对新的制度结构如何在实践中发挥作用的见解。在这两种情况下,论文都强调了成员国和利益相关者之间的持续分歧——这在一定程度上反映了更广泛的预算赢家/输家的分歧——在激进改革的倡导者(如英国、瑞典)和支持保留传统CAP的人(如法国、西班牙和爱尔兰)之间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Common Agricultural Policy and the EU budget: stasis or change?
After highlighting the budgetary context and the historical trends on the funding of the CAP, this paper considers contemporary debates about its reform in the context of two ‘historic firsts’. Negotiations about the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2014-20 for the first time took place in tandem with a proposed CAP reform, within the broader context set by the financial crisis after 2008. Second, the CAP reform debates took place within the new institutional arrangements introduced in the Lisbon Treaty, which by extending the co-decision mechanism to the CAP potentially has increased the influence of the European Parliament (EP). Indeed the CAP reform dossiers were the first real test of these new arrangements and provide an insight into how the new institutional structure will work in practice. In both cases the paper highlights a continuing cleavage among member states and stakeholder interests - that maps partly onto a broader budgetary gainers/losers division - between advocates of radical reform (e.g. the UK, Sweden) and those who favour the retention of the traditional CAP (such as France, Spain and Ireland).
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
European Journal of Government and Economics
European Journal of Government and Economics Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Government and Economics (EJGE) is an international academic journal for peer reviewed research on all aspects of government and economics. EJGE is particularly interested in current issues regarding the interrelationship between the fields of government and economics, from the influence of government on the economy (economic policy) to economic explanations of government (public choice). It is also particularly interested in questions directly or indirectly related to Europe.
×
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