Schroeder, Lilli Aline: Quantitative modelling of the Rural Development Programs of the Common Agricultural Policy - EU-wide and region-specific effects. - Bonn, 2021. - Dissertation, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn.
Online-Ausgabe in bonndoc: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hbz:5-61399
@phdthesis{handle:20.500.11811/8992,
urn: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hbz:5-61399,
author = {{Lilli Aline Schroeder}},
title = {Quantitative modelling of the Rural Development Programs of the Common Agricultural Policy - EU-wide and region-specific effects},
school = {Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn},
year = 2021,
month = mar,

note = {Rural Developments Programmes (RDPs) of EUs Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are implemented to promote agricultural competitiveness, sustainable management of natural resources and climate protection, and a balanced territorial development of rural areas. The Member States and the EU Commission evaluate the RDPs’ impacts. Quantitative cross-sector evaluations of RDPs at a larger scale are rare and challenging. Here, economic modelling is often used. The Common Agricultural Policy Regionalised Impact (CAPRI) modelling system combines regionalised computational general equilibrium models (CGEs) and mathematical programming. It facilitates analysing RDP effects at EU, region or farm-type level for the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors and associated environmental effects. Therefore, CAPRI serves as the main tool in this cumulative dissertation and is complemented by additional analyses of farmers’ acceptance of agri-environment schemes (AES).
First, we developed a CAPRI-CGE ex post scenario for Germany for 2006 simulating the impact of RD funding. I discussed the results with RDP evaluation experts and compared them to ex post evaluation reports and the literature. The CAPRI-CGE model link showed to be an appropriate unique cross-sectoral tool to quantify RDP net effects. The effects in Germany are small with the highest impact for the agricultural sector. GHG emissions per ha decreased, yet total GHG emissions increased due to increasing UAA and beef production. Agricultural income increased marginally. Farm investment programmes displaced private investments. More region-specific modelling and grouping of RD measures would better capture the EU heterogeneity of measures and regions. The inclusion of RDP related administration costs and deadweight effects would be a valuable model extension.
Second, we developed a CAPRI scenario for 2025 to analyse the impact of a budget shift of 15% from the first to the second pillar of the CAP. The results showed marginal impacts. The UAA in the EU28 decreased. Increased ruminant production eroded the reductions in GHG emissions linked to extensification. The environmental net effect of the budget shift remained positive for the EU28. For significant improvements in RD-policy goals, a higher budget shift and better targeting to regions and farm systems are needed.
Third, I assessed in which EU regions carbon sequestration through grassland enhancement would be most effective to mitigate GHG emissions. We simulated a voluntary and cost efficient increase in grassland area by 5% with the CAPRI model using the C-sequestration rates from the biogeochemistry CENTURY model and quantified the abatement costs. For the EU27, a net of 4.3 Mt CO2e could be mitigated at a cost of EUR 417 Mio. The greatest C-sequestration potential at relatively low costs was achieved primarily for large farms and farm-types specializing in ‘cereals and protein crops’, ‘mixed field cropping’ and ‘mixed crops-livestock farming’. France, Italy and Spain were the regions with the highest C-sequestration potential.
Fourth, I analysed behavioural patterns of farmers towards AES. I conducted interviews with farmers in Northern England using an ex post application of the sociological concept ‘Theory of planned Behaviour’ (TPB). The key aims of the English AES are judged to be achieved and appreciated by the farmers. For future scheme developments, farmers’ worries regarding increasing weeds and too much paperwork, and the high influence of farmers’ families should be considered. My innovative approach of applying the TPB ex post to evaluate the farmers’ acceptance of AES has shown to be feasible.},

url = {http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/8992}
}

The following license files are associated with this item:

InCopyright