1,327 research outputs found
Biofuels: effects on global agricultural prices and climate change
No full textBIOFUELS: EFFECTS ON GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL PRICES AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Biofuels: effects on global agricultural prices and climate change / Grethe, Harald (CC BY-NC-ND) (-
The EU entry price system for fresh fruits and vegetables - Paper tiger or powerful market barrier?
No full textThe EU protects EU growers of 15 kinds of fresh fruits and vegetables against international competition by the entry price system (EPS), which is designed to restrict imports below the product-specific, politically designated entry price level. This study investigates the relevance of the EPS per product and country of origin. We develop two indicators for the effectiveness of the EPS, which serve as variables in a cluster analysis identifying four classes differing in the relevance of the EPS. The relevance of the EPS is found to be heterogeneous among products as well as countries of origin. It is highest for artichokes, courgettes, Cucumbers, lemons, plums and tomatoes. The influence of the EPS on apples, clementines and pears is significantly lower, and of least relevance for apricots, mandarins, oranges, peaches and nectarines and table grapes. The EPS has the greatest effect oil countries which neighbour the EU, whereas it is of minor importance for exports from far-away countries with the exception of China and South Africa. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Volkswagen Foundatio
Turkey's Accession to the EU: What Will the Common Agricultural Policy Cost?
No full textAt the EU Council in December 2004, European heads of governments will decide on a potential date for the start of EU accession negotiations with Turkey. Various recent analyses assess the cost of applying the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU (CAP) to Turkey without taking into account the specific structure of the agricultural sector in Turkey, which would determine the receipts from EU funds. This paper assesses potential budgetary effects resulting from the application of the CAP to Turkey, if Turkey should accede in 2014. The analysis is based on macroeconomic projections from the literature, equilibrium modelling of the Turkish agricultural sector, and projections of the future development of the CAP. It is found that total EU budgetary outlays for the application of the CAP to Turkey could total about €3.3 billion in 2014 and rise to €5 billion in 2024 due to full phasing in of direct payments and rural development policies. The resulting net transfer under the CAP to Turkey would be about €1.6 billion in 2014 and could increase to €2.6 billion in 2024. Such sums take a backseat to projected transfers under the structural policy of the EU and the overall political project of including Turkey in the EU. Key Words: Turkey, EU accession, CAP, budgetary effects Im Dezember 2004 wird der Europäische Rat über die Festlegung eines Zeitpunkts zur Aufnahme von Beitrittsverhandlungen mit der Türkei entscheiden. Die Diskussion über die aus der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik der EU (GAP) resultierenden Budgetwirkungen eines EUBeitritts basiert bisher meist auf Schatzungen, die die spezifische Struktur des turkischen Agrarsektors sowie zukunftige Anderungen der GAP bis zu einem Beitritt der Turkei kaum einbeziehen. In diesem Beitrag werden die aus der GAP resultierenden Budgetwirkungen eines potentiellen EU-Beitritts der Türkei im Jahr 2014 auf Grundlage der Literatur entnommener makrookonomischer Projektionen, Abschatzungen zukunftiger Anderungen der GAP sowie einem Gleichgewichtsmodell des turkischen Agrarsektors analysiert. Im Ergebnis ergeben sich EU-Zahlungen an die Türkei im Rahmen der GAP von insgesamt 3,3 Mrd. im Jahr 2014, die nach einer schrittweisen Einfuhrung des vollen Umfangs der GAP im Jahre 2024 etwa 5 Mrd. betragen. Der sich aus der GAP potentiell ergebende Netto-Transfer aus dem EU-Budget an die Türkei betragt 1,6 Mrd. im Jahr 2014 und steigt bis 2024 auf etwa 2,6 Mrd. an. Im Verhaltnis zu den sich voraussichtlich aus der europaischen Strukturpolitik ergebenden Transfers und dem politischen Gesamtvorhaben einer Integration der Turkei sind diese Summen eher unbedeutend. Schlusselworter: Turkei, EU-Beitritt, Gemeinsame Agrarpolitik, budgetwirkungenTurkey, EU accession, CAP, budgetary effects, Agricultural and Food Policy,
Quality Standards for Food Products - A Particular Burden for Small Producers in Developing Countries?
No full textThis paper develops an analytical framework which structures the problem of whether, how and to what extent small producers in developing countries are disadvantaged by the increasing prevalence of food quality standards. Based on a literature review, the empirical evidence is structured and research gaps are identified. The paper finds that small and medium producers rarely comply without support from downstream actors. In case of well-educated and relatively wealthy farmers, forward integration is also found. No empirical support exists for the intuitively appealing hypothesis of a lower cost of compliance per unit of output for large producers. Zusammenfassung In diesem Papier wird ein Analyserahmen entwickelt, um die Möglichkeit und das Ausmaß der Benachteiligung von Kleinlandwirten in Entwicklungsländern durch die zunehmende Verbreitung von Qualitätsstandards für Produkte der Agrar- und Ernährungsindustrie zu strukturieren. In einer Literaturübersicht werden die Ergebnisse empirischer Studien ausgewertet und Forschungslücken identifiziert. Es wird gezeigt, dass Kleinlandwirte aufwändige Prozessstandards selten ohne die Unterstützung von Unternehmen auf nachgelagerten Stufen der Wertschöpfungskette implementieren. Die einleuchtende und weit verbreitete Hypothese, dass die Cost of Compliance per Produkteinheit für große Produzenten niedriger als für kleine Produzenten seien, wurde bisher empirisch nicht bestätigt.Quality Standards, International Trade, EUREPGAP, Certification, Small Farmers, Developing Countries, Cost of Compliance, Agribusiness, International Relations/Trade,
Turkey's accession to the EU : what will the Common Agricultural Policy cost? / Harald Grethe
No full textAt the EU Council in December 2004, European heads of governments will decide on a potential date for the start of EU accession negotiations with Turkey. Various recent analyses assess the cost of applying the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU (CAP) to Turkey without taking into account the specific structure of the agricultural sector in Turkey, which would determine the receipts from EU funds. This paper assesses potential budgetary effects resulting from the application of the CAP to Turkey, if Turkey should accede in 2014. The analysis is based on macroeconomic projections from the literature, equilibrium modelling of the Turkish agricultural sector, and projections of the future development of the CAP. It is found that total EU budgetary outlays for the application of the CAP to Turkey could total about €3.3 billion in 2014 and rise to €5 billion in 2024 due to full phasing in of direct payments and rural development policies. The resulting net transfer under the CAP to Turkey would be about €1.6 billion in 2014 and could increase to €2.6 billion in 2024. Such sums take a backseat to projected transfers under the structural policy of the EU and the overall political project of including Turkey in the EU.Zsfassung in dt. Sprach
Budgetary Effects of Including the CEC into Dynamic Modulation
No full textThe EU Commission suggests to exclude CEC from the dynamic modulation mechanism, being part of the MTR package. This article looks at the distributional aspects of including the CEC into dynamic modulation. Under the current accession proposal the CEC would account for only 18% of the rural development budget by 2006. If modulation would be realised with the CEC being excluded this share would drop to 14% by 2010. According to the criteria proposed by the Commission for the distribution of the modulation budget the CEC would get a higher share of the modulation budget if they were included as they account for high shares in agricultural area and employment, and their GDP per capita is relatively low. Based on the assumptions made for this article they would be eligible for about 66% of the modulation budget. As a result of their participation in the modulation mechanism their share in the rural development budget would be at 30% by 2010. The financial net gains for the CEC from participation are estimated to be at 1.7 bln. €.Modulation, EU-enlargement, CAP-budget, Agricultural and Food Policy,
- …
