Synthèse de séminaire
| 19/01/2010
Report of the Seminar organised by Notre Europe and SIEPS on September 16, 2009 in Stockholm.
A project coordinated by Nadège Chambon and Jonas Eriksson, with contributions by David Baldock, Csaba Csáki, Thierry de l’Escaille,Rolf Eriksson, Tassos Haniotis, Marjorie Jouen, Louis-Pascal Mahé, Karl Erik Olsson and Ewa Rabinowicz.
Preface: The Future CAP: The Need for a European Public Debate
In 2008 the World experienced both the return of the spectre of food shortages and the collapse of financial markets. But these events did not cause a revolution in thinking among farming specialists of the kind seen in other economic sectors and in the banking world, where there was much talk of renewed market regulation. Surprisingly, agriculture and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) – so often the subject of passionate debate in Europe – seem to have escaped this reappraisal. It is true that the debate on agricultural regulation is weighed down by past experience, in particular concerning the cost of surpluses and stocks before 1992.
Despite the process of continual reform launched by Ray MacSharry and pursued by each of his successors, the CAP remains the object of lively criticism. It has been judged inequitable, costly and poorly adapted to needs, and it is often accused of being incoherent with the objectives of other EU policies.These observations are constantly repeated by the CAP’s detractors. Rarely are they followed up by in-depth debate – much needed by the EU – on the role of agriculture and rural development, and their regulation.
The CAP is the subject of questioning, but the future of European agricultural regulation will not be determined until the conclusion of negotiations on the financial perspectives beyond 2013. These negotiations, to take place in 2011 and 2012, will define the budget allocated to the CAP, and thus the EU’s capacity to regulate markets during crises and to remunerate agricultural services which are not remunerated by the market (amenities). These debates, led in parallel by the ECOFIN, agriculture and general affairs committees, worry supporters of a strong common policy – who remember the depressing battles, waged between Member States in previous budget negotiations, over the numbers involved in national contributions.
To prevent the CAP – a weakened EU policy in terms of legitimacy – from becoming the victim of budgetary trade-offs, European farm ministers have been leading an exhaustive debate on the post-2013 future of agricultural policy. Little known to the public, it has been in progress since the opening of the trio of French, Czech and Swedish Presidencies of the EU; during informal agricultural Council meetings. This debate focuses on the major issues currently dealt with by the CAP, helping to define a renewed policy adapted to medium-term challenges and an agricultural budget based on a new political project. The debate is a long way from generating a consensus: the members of the 2008–2009 trio show three different, hardly compatible, approaches
Articles by
Nadège Chambon :
