The Impact of Pillar II Funding: Validation from a Modelling and Evaluation Perspective.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Impact of Pillar II Funding: Validation from a Modelling and Evaluation Perspective. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Schroeder, Lilli Aline, Gocht, Alexander, Britz, Wolfgang |
| Source: | Journal of Agricultural Economics. Jun2015, Vol. 66 Issue 2, p415-441. 27p. |
| Subjects: | Farm income, Agricultural policy, Agricultural economics, Economic equilibrium, Greenhouse gas mitigation, Computable general equilibrium models |
| Geographic Terms: | Germany |
| Abstract: | We extend the Common Agricultural Policy Regionalised Impact Modelling System ( CAPRI) with a regional computational general equilibrium ( CGE) model to estimate the effects of the Pillar II of the Common Agricultural Policy. Our aim is to assess the modeling approach by comparing the scenario results with observations from the evaluation reports for rural development, supplemented with expert interviews and findings from the literature. For this purpose, an ex-post scenario is developed for Germany that models the effect of the Pillar II measures in 2006. We observe a moderate impact, namely, an increase in agricultural income (5%) and agricultural land use (0.15%), particularly grassland, and a substitution of arable land with grassland. This effect leads to a total increase in agricultural production, particularly of beef, and to an increase in total greenhouse gas emissions and total nitrogen surplus for Germany. Greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient surpluses per ha, however, are reduced. We observe that farm investment programmes displace private investment. The evaluation reports confirm the moderate impact and our major results, as does the comparison with other literature. However, the conclusions about agri-environment measures and their impact on income differ. The most important difference between our results and the evaluation reports and majority of the present literature is that we also quantify the joint effect between the whole economy and policy measures, with some contradictory effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Agricultural Economics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | We extend the Common Agricultural Policy Regionalised Impact Modelling System ( CAPRI) with a regional computational general equilibrium ( CGE) model to estimate the effects of the Pillar II of the Common Agricultural Policy. Our aim is to assess the modeling approach by comparing the scenario results with observations from the evaluation reports for rural development, supplemented with expert interviews and findings from the literature. For this purpose, an ex-post scenario is developed for Germany that models the effect of the Pillar II measures in 2006. We observe a moderate impact, namely, an increase in agricultural income (5%) and agricultural land use (0.15%), particularly grassland, and a substitution of arable land with grassland. This effect leads to a total increase in agricultural production, particularly of beef, and to an increase in total greenhouse gas emissions and total nitrogen surplus for Germany. Greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient surpluses per ha, however, are reduced. We observe that farm investment programmes displace private investment. The evaluation reports confirm the moderate impact and our major results, as does the comparison with other literature. However, the conclusions about agri-environment measures and their impact on income differ. The most important difference between our results and the evaluation reports and majority of the present literature is that we also quantify the joint effect between the whole economy and policy measures, with some contradictory effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0021857X |
| DOI: | 10.1111/1477-9552.12091 |
