Farm Level Impacts of Trade Liberalisation and CAP Removal Across EU: An Assessment using the IFM-CAP Model

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-126
Author(s):  
Pavel Ciaian ◽  
Kamel Louhichi ◽  
Angel Perni

This paper assesses the farm-level impacts of trade liberalisation and CAP removal across EU using IFM-CAP (Individual Farm Model for CAP Analysis). IFM-CAP is a static positive programming model developed to capture the full heterogeneity of EU farms in terms of feedback to policy representation and impacts. Simulation results show that a small set of farm-types experience an increase in income due to the improvement in prices and yields (e.g. farms specialised in granivores, milk and horticulture), while farms that are most CAP subsidy dependent (e.g. specialist cattle, specialist COP and small farms) lose income by more than 12% at aggregate EU level. As much as 77% of all farms lose income if CAP is removed, while the proportion of most income vulnerable farms almost doubles.

2021 ◽  
Vol 117 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Jaka ŽGAJNAR ◽  
Luka JUVANČIČ ◽  
Stane KAVČIČ ◽  
Emil ERJAVEC

Assessment based on representative farms is an established approach in the modern assessment of the effects of changes in agricultural policy. In line with previous CAP reforms, we can expect income redistribution impacts also with the implementation of the legislative and financial framework of the CAP for the next period. This paper discusses a scenario analysis using the farm model. The model is based on linear programming, which enables to address various technological challenges at farm level. We formed the scenarios for the analysis following the example of the scenarios contained in the impact assessment that the European Commission prepared for the CAP after 2020. The analysis involves selected farm types from selected sectors. The results suggest that the expected reduction in the envelope will generally lead to lower farm-level revenues from CAP direct payments. Consequently, economic performance will deteriorate, what is likely to be amplified in some sectors by the abolition of historical payments. The range of consequences at farm level will likely be considerable, especially for sectors and production types with a high share of CAP payments in the structure of total farm income. In certain sectors, however, there is even an improvement regarding the current situation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 250-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamel Louhichi ◽  
Pavel Ciaian ◽  
Maria Espinosa ◽  
Liesbeth Colen ◽  
Angel Perni ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamel Louhichi ◽  
Pavel Ciaian ◽  
Maria Espinosa ◽  
Angel Perni ◽  
Sergio Gomez y Paloma

2015 ◽  
Vol 153 (4) ◽  
pp. 676-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. VOSOUGH AHMADI ◽  
S. SHRESTHA ◽  
S.G. THOMSON ◽  
A.P. BARNES ◽  
A.W. STOTT

SUMMARYThe latest Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reforms could bring substantial changes to Scottish farming communities. Two major components of this reform package, an introduction of environmental measures into the Pillar 1 payments and a move away from historical farm payments towards regionalized area payments, would have a significant effect on altering existing support structures for Scottish farmers, as it would for similar farm types elsewhere in Europe where historic payments are used. An optimizing farm-level model was developed to explore how Scottish beef and sheep farms might be affected by the greening and flat rate payments under the current CAP reforms. Nine different types of beef and sheep farms were identified and detailed biophysical and financial farm-level data for these farm types were used to parameterize the model. Results showed that the greening measures of the CAP did not have much impact on net margins of most of the beef and sheep farm businesses, except for ‘Beef Finisher’ farm types where the net margins decreased by 3%. However, all farm types were better off adopting the greening measures than not qualifying for the greening payments through non-compliance with the measures. The move to regionalized farm payments increased the negative financial impact of greening on most of the farms but it was still substantially lower than the financial sacrifice of not adopting greening measures. Results of maximizing farm net margin, under a hypothetical assumption of excluding farm payments, showed that in most of the mixed (sheep and cattle) and beef suckler cattle farms the optimum stock numbers predicted by the model were lower than actual figures on farm. When the regionalized support payments were allocated to each farm, the proportion of the mixed farms that would increase their stock numbers increased whereas this proportion decreased for beef suckler farms and no impact was predicted in sheep farms. Also under the regionalized support payments, improvements in profitability were found in mixed farms and sheep farms. Some of the specialized beef suckler farms also returned a profit when CAP support was added.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Reader ◽  
Paul Wilson ◽  
Stephen Ramsden ◽  
Ian D. Hodge ◽  
Ben G.A. Lang

Abstract To find opportunities to improve performance, comparisons between farms are often made using aggregates of standard typologies. Being aggregates, farm types in these typologies contain significant numbers of atypical enterprises and thus average figures do not reflect the farming situations of individual farmers wishing to compare their performance with farms of a 'similar' type. We present a novel method that matches a specific farm against all farms in a survey (drawing upon the Farm Business Survey sample) and then selects the nearest 'bespoke farm group' of matches based on distance (Z-score). We do this across 34 dimensions that capture a wide range of English farm characteristics, including tenure and geographic proximity. Means and other statistics are calculated specifically for that bespoke farm comparator group, or 'peer set'. This generates a uniquely defined comparator for each individual farm that could substantially improve key-performance-indicators, such as unit costs of production, which can be used for benchmarking purposes. This methodology has potential to be applied across the full range of FBS farm types and in a wider range of benchmarking contexts.


1998 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-136
Author(s):  
A. Maatman ◽  
H. Sawadogo ◽  
C. Schweigman ◽  
A. Ouedraogo

Agricultural production in the NW Burkina Faso is seriously endangered by soil erosion and an overall decline in soil fertility. In the past 15 years various anti-erosion methods have been adopted in this region with some success. The widespread promotion of rock bunds is an important example. Land conservation methods alone without increased efforts to maintain (or to increase) soil fertility levels does not suffice in the long run. The potential impact of a combination of rock bunds and zai, a local technology to improve water infiltration and efficiency of manure application, was investigated. The analysis is carried out at farm level with a stochastic linear programming model. It includes sequential decision making to cope with rainfall risks. The study shows the important potential of rock bunds and application of zai, and limitations due to labour and manure constraints. The techniques are largely applied on common fields. Changes in labour organization and use of manure have to be introduced before women may profit from these techniques on their individual fields. The results show that the impact on farm-level food security is more limited than is sometimes supposed on the basis of a simple extrapolation of plot-level results.


Achieving sustainability in agriculture is a complex, dynamic, and ideal state that may never be fully achieved and a progressive process where the influential factors are also changing. In a dynamic environment there is a state of equilibrium reference point to which the sector can analyze its status in relation to that reference. A change in one variable among several will affect a change in the equilibrium status that is always in a state of constant change. An individual farm enterprise is, by far, less complex and dynamic than the agriculture sector and can be defined in more specific terms with achievable measures. However, it remains an ideal but not as elusive. This chapter shows how such an ideal diversified farm model from initial start up to mature sustainability may be represented with a theoretical model based on the actual practice of diversified-integrated farming.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document