"Veliki prasak" proširenja i reforma Zajedničke poljoprivredne politike

The article analyses the influence of the 2004 enlargement and of the 1998-2002 accession negotiations on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform. In contrast to the dominant liberal institutional political economy models that explain preenlargement CAP reforms in terms of the negative trade related policy externalities, the common budget expenses and the specific role played by the common institutional setting, a critical realist explanatory model is proposed. In accordance with the model, the reforms were facilitated by the conflicting interests and the differences in capacity of the capital fixed to agricultural production in the member states and the candidate countries. The capacity of the agro-capital is defined by comparing the agricultural production structures, which were in the case of the old member states sustaining high levels of the fixed capital and which were in the case of the candidate countries, on average, underdeveloped and under-capitalized. The model is supported by the empirical analysis of the CAP reform and the accession negotiations process.U članku se analizira utjecaj proširenja iz 2004. i pristupnih pregovora od 1998. do 2002. na reformu Zajedničke poljoprivredne politike (ZPP). Za razliku od prevladavajućih političko-ekonomskih modela liberalnog institucionalizma, koji ZPP reforme iz vremena prije proširenja objašnjavaju negativnim trgovinskim vanjskim učincima, zajedničkim proračunskim rashodima i specifičnom ulogom koju je odigrao zajednički institucionalni okvir predlaže se kritičko- -realistički model tumačenja. U skladu s modelom, reforme su olakšane zbog sukobljenih interesa i razlika u kreditnoj sposobnosti povezanoj s poljoprivrednom proizvodnjom u zemljama članicama i zemljama kandidatkinjama. Kapacitet agrokapitala definiran je usporedbom struktura poljoprivredne proizvodnje, koje su u slučaju starih država članica održavale visoke razine fiksnoga kapitala, a koje su u slučaju zemalja kandidatkinja, u prosjeku, bile nerazvijene i potkapitalizirane. Model podupire empirijska analiza reforme ZPP-a i procesa pristupnih pregovora

European views on the UK’s renegotiation: France, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Latvia

The success or failure of David Cameron’s planned renegotiation of the UK’s EU membership will depend to a large extent on how the other 27 EU member states respond to his proposals. But how do countries across the EU view the UK’s renegotiation? Building on a report published in 2014 by the German Council on Foreign Relations, EUROPP is running a series of overviews of the renegotiation from each of the EU’s member states. Compiled by the LSE’s Tim Oliver and written by authors based at universities and research institutions, the overviews will set out what discussion – if any – there has been about the renegotiation and the wider views within each country on a potential Brexit. This post is the second in the series and gives views from France, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Latvia. France: The French are looking for a fair deal for France and the EU, not just Britain Netherlands: There is support for the UK’s renegotiation, but only up to a point Slovenia: The government believes the EU’s four freedoms should remain the basis for any change Latvia: National security, not EU reform, is the priorit

The Political Economy of the 2014-2020 Common Agricultural Policy: An Imperfect Storm. CEPS Paperback, 17 August 2015

After five years of debates, consultations and negotiations, the European institutions reached an agreement in 2013 on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the 2014-2020 period. The outcome has major implications for the EU’s budget and farmers’ incomes but also for Europe’s environment, its contribution to global climate change and to food security in the EU and in the world. It was decided to spend more than €400 billion during the rest of the decade on the CAP.The official claims are that the new CAP will take better account of society's expectations and lead to far-reaching changes by making subsidies fairer and ‘greener’ and making the CAP more efficient. It is also asserted that the CAP will play a key part in achieving the overall objective of promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. However, there is significant scepticism about these claims and disappointment with the outcome of the decision-making, the first in which the European Parliament was involved under the co-decision procedure. In contrast to earlier reforms where more substantive changes were made to the CAP, the factors that induced the policy discussions in 2008-13 and those that influenced the decision-making did not reinforce each other. On the contrary, they sometimes counteracted one another, yielding an ‘imperfect storm’ as it were, resulting in more status quo and fewer changes. This book discusses the outcome of the decision-making and the factors that influenced the policy choices and decisions. It brings together contributions from leading academics from various disciplines and policy-makers, and key participants in the process from the European Commission and the European Parliament

The co-decision trap: how the co-decision procedure hindered CAP reform

Since the 1980s, the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy has undergone a series of reforms that were facilitated by the changes in decision-making rules such as the introduction of the qualified majority vote. This article argues that the introduction of the co-decision procedure under the Lisbon Treaty, which increased the European Parliament’s legislative powers, has generated a “co-decision trap” that has hindered further reforms

The common agricultural policy health check

In 2008, the ministers of agriculture of European Union member states made a political agreement on the Common Agricultural Policy reform, also known as the Health Check. The reform coincided with three things: the ongoing Doha round of the World Trade Organization negotiationspolitical pressures to limit the costs of the policy financed from the common budgetand various \u27new\u27 policy issues. Rational institutional and constructivist approaches, which are often viewed as theoretical alternatives with each explaining some aspects of the reform, have employed simplified and narrow abstractions in conceptualising the role of these policy contexts. In order to identify the mechanisms facilitating the Health Check, a critical realist approach is proposed here, arguing that the relationship among the trade negotiations, budget bargaining, new issues and the policy reform can be explained by theoretically endorsing the asymmetrical development of the agricultural production factors and of production relations. A qualitative analysis is used to determine which of these three approaches seems to be better able to explain the empirical evidence

The role of industrial revival in untapping the bioeconomy’s potential in Central and Eastern Europe

The bioeconomy occupies the centre of the Green Deal, the EU’s plan to support transformative growth following the COVID-19 episode. However, parts of the EU, such as countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) continue to lag behind in harnessing the potential held by the bioeconomy. This article argues that in CEE countries, where the primary and conventional bioeconomy sectors play a more important role, ‘early’ transition pathways such as improvements in productivity and practice- as well as commercialisation-oriented innovation (the do–use–interact model: DUI) are just as important as approaches based on (generally publicly supported) R&D, innovation adoption, and technology transfer (science–technology–innovation model: STI), typically associated with high-value bioindustrial applications. The argument is tested by conducting a survey of 352 experts in the region that gives an insight into the CEE macro-region’s assets with respect to deploying the bioeconomy’s potential and assessing the transition pathways relevant to the better performance of bioeconomy (primary, manufacturing, and other related) sectors. The results show the particular relevance of consolidating the primary and traditional sectors to support improvements in productivity based on the vertical and horizontal interaction typically associated with DUI, while the relevance of STI is mostly linked to advanced sectors, which are narrowly distributed across the region. The findings are relevant to policy given that the EU’s bioeconomy policy has thus far chiefly focused on STI support that better corresponds to the needs of countries at more advanced stages of developing the bioeconomy, but is less appropriate for the specific context and needs of CEE

Common agricultural policy health check

The article analyses Common agricultural policy (CAP) Health Check (HC) negotiations process and outcome. It proposes realist, structural economic model, based on Moravcsik\u27s liberal intergovernmental theory, which has distinct conceptual and methodological characteristics from major theoretical models on recent CAP reforms. Instead of focusing on institutionally embedded European policy-making, it is proposed that national interest articulation process is relatively autonomous, that common decisions are determined through two level distributional bargaining games and that policy changes are essentially underpinned by global development of competitive forces. Research is focused on formal statements and positions expressed by actors involved in the process, on economic rationale of different mechanisms and on CAP\u27s economic effects on different interest groups. Analysis which heavily draws from specialized first and second hand resources supports the proposed model. It is concluded that state-structured decision making and economic forces development are driving CAP reforms towards greater national flexibility in targeting and financing.Članek analizira proces Zdravstvenega pregleda Skupne kmetijske politike (SKP) in njegov končni izid. Predlaga realistični, strukturni ekonomski model, osnovan na Moravcsik-ovi liberalni medvladni teoriji, ki se konceptualno in metodološko razlikuje od prevladujočih teorij, ki pojasnjujejo zadnje reforme SKP. Namesto poudarjanja institucionalno vpetega evropskega političnega procesa, model predpostavlja, da je proces oblikovanja nacionalnih interesov držav članic relativno avtonomen, da skupne odločitve določajo dvostopenjska pogajanja in da na aktualne spremembe v politikah ključno vpliva razvoj svetovnih konkurenčnih sil. Raziskovalno delo se osredotoči na formalne izjave in interesne pozicije, ki so jih izrazili akterji vključeni v proces, na ekonomsko vlogo posameznih mehanizmov in na učinke SKP na različne interesne skupine. Analiza, ki črpa iz primarnih in sekundarnih virov, podpira predlagan model. Članek zaključuje, da državno-centrično odločanje in razvoj ekonomskih silnic vodijo reforme SKP proti večji nacionalni prožnosti pri ciljih in financiranju skupne politike