Modernising and Simplifying the Common Agricultural Policy Hearing of the European Economic and Social Committee "A possible reshaping of the Common Agricultural Policy" Brussels -19 April 2017 Tassos Haniotis Director AGRI.C - Strategy, Simplification and Policy Analysis European Commission #FutureofCAP
Achievements of the CAP reform path Summarising the CAP debate Bridging the gap between world and EU farm prices, thus increasing competitiveness Turning the EU from a major tradeplayer for both exports and imports into a net agro-food exporter Providing relative income stability within a very volatile income and price environment Shortcomings of the CAP reform path Despite progress, the environmental performance of EU agriculture requires further improvement Productivity growth is mainly driven by the outflow of labour, and less by research or innovation Questions on equity, safety net and simplicityof the CAP are still hotly debated Drivers and future challenges The changing commodity, economic and price environment The changing trade environment especially the shift from multilateral to regional agreements New climate change, environmental and broader sustainability priorities 2
Main issues for the future CAP debate: public money for private and/or public goods? 80 70 billion EUR EU-10 EU-12 EU-15 EU-25 EU-27 % GDP outlook 2015-2020 0,8% 0,7% 60 0,6% 50 0,5% 40 0,4% 30 0,3% 20 0,2% 10 0,1% 0 0,0% 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Export subsidies Other market measures Coupled support Decoupled support of which direct payments of which green payments Rural development - environment/climate Rural development - other measures CAP as share of EU GDP Source: DG AGRI. 3
The trend in real commodity prices observed till 2011 200 (2010 = 100) 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Agriculture Fertilizers Energy Metals & minerals Source: World Bank. 4
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 dramatically changed in recent years 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 (2010 = 100) Agriculture Fertilizers Energy Metals & minerals Source: World Bank. 5
Climate linked loss events in dramatic increase 800 Natural catastrophes worldwide - number of events 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Meteorological events Hydrological events Climatological events Meteorological events: Tropical storm, extra-tropical storm, convective storm, local storm Hydrological events: Flood, mass movement Climatological events: Extreme temperature, drought, forest fire Source: 2017 Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE(January 2017) 6
The "greening" architecture of the CAP Implementation mechanism Cumulative environmental benefits Greening Cross compliance Rural development Agricultural area (eligible for direct payments) Voluntary with compensation for cost incurred and income forgone Mandatory with financial support (decoupled green payment per hectare) Regulatory (Statutory Management Requirements and Good Agricultural Environmental Conditions) 7 7
raised questions on the relationship of its layers MODERNISATION 2 nd layer of agri-environmental measures Question: Which criteria to link to 1 st layer? Research Innovation Advice 1 st layer of agri-environmental measures Question: Mandatory or voluntary? Control Results Performance Cross compliance Question: Only regulatory elements included? SIMPLIFICATION 8
Turning tensions into synergies and better targets Tensions that the future CAP has to address The economyversus the environment and the impact of cost pressure on environmental ambitions Subsidiarity versus simplification especially with respect to EU value added priorities Jobsversus growth the difficult, but also promising impact of new technologies on agriculture Synergies that the future CAP has to develop Find the right balanceof support between the private and the public good both face market failures Redefine the balance between EU, MS and farm responsibilities to simplify and avoid policy failures Address jobs and growthchallenges in rural areas and in the food chain to enhance resilience Main questions that the future CAP has to reassess and address Better targetingrequires a clear choice of the main target is it the farm or its land? Shift towards performancerequires a fundamental rethinking of control logic (what, why, how) Technologies(especially of EU-lead) provide major opportunities, but meet resistance in their use 9
Reports and data available at: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/index_en.htm https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/index_en.htm https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/impact-assessment/index_en.htm https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/markets-and-prices/index_en.htm https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/events/2016-outlook-conference_en https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/statistics_en https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-indicators_en https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/consultations/cap-modernising/2017_en Thank you for your attention! 10