Proceedings of the OECD/PACIOLI Workshop on Information Needs for the Analysis of Farm Household Income Issues

The assessment of agricultural policies depends more and more on micro-economic data sets. This is especially true for policies with an income objective in a situation where farm households have different income sources. Among others the OECD has stressed this point in recent years with analytical reports. The PACIOLI network yearly brings together data managers and researchers interested in the innovation of data collection in this area. In April 2004 a joint workshop was organised at the OECD in Paris to bring experts together to exchange best practices. This report contains the proceedings of that workshop.Farm Management,

Business Dynamics with Scenarios on Dutch Agriculture and its Institutional Arrangements

This paper investigates the development in the Durch Agri-Food innovation system.  Main components of the system are agriculture and agribusiness, the promotion of interests in the lobby system and the knowledge system. Each has its own dynamics but they are until now tied together by institutional arrangements. Based on a historical description we formulate a simple business dynamics model. The robustness of the system is investigated by a scenario analysis. Results have been checked by interviews with experts

Hacking the CAP – Options to redesign the European Agricultural Policy

In 2020 the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union has to be renewed. This raises the question which policy would be optimal for the 3rd decade of the century, seen the changes in agriculture (decline in the number of farmers, effect of ict and other new technologies, concentration in the food chain etc.) and public issues that ask for solutions (climate change, sustainability, need for jobs and growth in rural development, food policy etc.)The history of the CAP has shown that policy changes are often incremental. Some argue that especially in 2020 changes will be small as the term of the policy is out of sync with the budget cycle (important decisions on the CAP are not taken without a decision on the EU’s financial framework) and as the CAP decision will be at the moment that the current commissioners hand over their mandate to their successors. However this should not prevent scholars from coming up with fresh ideas on how the policy could be made more effective and efficient for a resilient agriculture and food and nutrition security in a sustainable environment.To do so, this paper takes the view that the CAP is a bundle of policy instruments to reach several policy objectives, that not necessarily are consistent or have synergies but where trade-offs exist. That means that Tinbergen’s rule applies: achieving the desired values of a certain number of policy targets requires the policy maker to control an equal number of instruments.In our analysis we re-interpret Article 33 of the Treaty of the European Union (that defines the CAP) in current policy objectives and specific targets. We then look for the most effective policy instruments for each of these targets. We discuss synergies between instruments in the execution of the policy. To test the robustness of these policy targets and instruments we stress-test them against three scenario’s for the future of agriculture and the food system: High Tech, Self-Organisation and Collapse. These three scenarios have been published by the EU’s Standing Committee on Agricultural Research’s strategic working group AKIS (Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems).This leads to a redesigned CAP, fit for the 3rd decade of this century, as robust as possible for external scenario’s on agriculture. Finally we discuss the discrepancy between the current CAP and our suggestions for the redesigned CAP

Support for farmers' cooperatives: EU synthesis and comparative analysis report: policy measures

In order to foster the competitiveness of the food supply chain, the European Commission is committed to promote and facilitate the restructuring and consolidation of the agricultural sector by encouraging the creation of voluntary agricultural producer organisations. To support the policy making process DG Agriculture and Rural Development has launched a large study, “Support for Farmers’ Cooperatives (SFC)”, that will provide insights on successful cooperatives and producer organisations as well as on effective support measures for these organisations. These insights can be used by farmers themselves, in setting up and strengthening their collective organisation, and by the European Commission in its effort to encourage the creation of agricultural producer organisations in the EU. Within the framework of the SFC project this EU synthesis and comparative analysis report - Policy Measures has been written. Data collection for this report has been done in the summer of 2011. In addition to this report, the SFC-project has delivered 27 country reports, a report on policies for cooperatives in non-EU OECD countries, 8 sector reports, 5 other EU synthesis and comparative analysis reports, 33 case studies, a report on cluster analysis, and a final report

Adjustment and differences in farm performance; A farm management perspective from the Netherlands

There are differences in performance between farmers. In the Netherlands this has been a major topic of research for at least 30 years. Research has shown that the managerial capacities of farmers play a major role in differences in economic and environmental performance. Management can be measured and the optimal level is not the maximum level. Farmers differ in their objectives, competences and local external situation and there-fore their strategies. These strategies can be identified. In recent years strategic management has become more important and this can be supported with consultancy. Farmers also differ in their adoption and innovation behaviour. These micro-economic results, which correlate with large differences in income and high prices of fixed assets with a limited supply, can be explained as being consistent with economic theory on perfect markets. Although these findings suggest that some farm households have attractive strategies that can cope with policy adjustments, the research supports the hypothesis but does not (yet) prove that a severe adjustment of agricultural policy e.g. towards a more market oriented policy, induces more innovation, and that due to this innovation the effects of adjusting the agricultural policy are less severe than estimated ex ante with current dynamic policy models.Farm Management,

Struggle for Leadership: the Competitiveness of the EU and US Food Industry

Globalization is an important issue in the food industry, although most food is still locally produced and consumed. Many small and medium enterprises characterize the industry. Results of WTO negotiations intensify the international competition, in which the EU and USA are the largest players. Countries like Brazil, India and China are gaining market share. This raises the following research questions: 1. How competitive are the EU and US food industry and their sub-sectors? 2. Which role plays innovation and legislation in the competitiveness of the industry? 3. How will the competitiveness develop under future globalization and trade liberalization? The goal of this study is to fill these knowledge gaps.Agribusiness, International Relations/Trade,

Administrative burdens and dairy industry competitiveness

The goal of this paper is to assess the effect of regulatory burdens in the European dairy industry on its competitiveness. A theoretical foundation is provided by transaction cost economics and total quality management insights. The effects of legislation on administrative requirements and competitiveness are supposed to be mediated by impacts on innovativeness, company strategy, food safety system availability, as well as the available information & communication capabilities. We will connect to previous research (Wijnands et al., 2007) and the findings therein. Four sub-questions are addressed: • what is the relationship between administrative burdens, innovation and competitiveness? • what is the relationship between administrative burdens, food safety & quality system deployment and competitiveness? • what is the relationship between administrative burdens, food labelling requirements and competitiveness? • what is the relationship between administrative burdens, supply chain transparency and competitiveness? In addition to the theoretical framework presented earlier in Bremmers et al., 2008, this paper contains the first results of a survey in the European dairy industry. They are combined with the proceeds from a literature search. The results show that (Q1) especially product innovation is negatively impacted by administrative burdens. Food safety and quality systems (Q2) serve to provide a level playing field in Europe. They would be installed also if no legal requirements would enforce them, because clients ask for it, so that administrative burdens could easily be attributed to business strategy rather than legal obligations. To reduce administrative burdens, we advice to integrate food safety and quality requirements is necessary. It would reduce monitoring and reporting costs, both for private as well as public parties. Food labeling (Q3) (a ‘made in Europe’ origin marking) could work contraproductive with respect to the competitive position of dairy firms and will have an increase of administrative burdens as a net-effect. And last but not least (Q4), increased chain transparency (mentioning the name of intermediary producers on the end-product package) will accelerate administrative burdens, but will only be beneficial for SMEs with a differentiated product. Commodity-producers in the dairy industry which only follow a cost strategy will gradually merge and/or disappear.dairy industry, competitiveness, administrative burdens, food safety, labelling, Livestock Production/Industries,

Business Dynamics with Scenarios on Dutch Agriculture and its Institutional Arrangements

This paper investigates the development in the Durch Agri-Food innovation system.&nbsp; Main components of the system are agriculture and agribusiness, the promotion of interests in the lobby system and the knowledge system. Each has its own dynamics but they are until now tied together by institutional arrangements. Based on a historical description we formulate a simple business dynamics model. The robustness of the system is investigated by a scenario analysis. Results have been checked by interviews with experts.</span

Approaches to Obtaining Income Data: The Case of the Netherlands

This paper provides some information on the experiences in the Netherlands with obtaining micro economic data on household incomes in agriculture. To understand the situation in the Netherlands, the next section gives some background on agriculture and policy making in the Netherlands. This explains the role that the FADN plays, and why it is an attractive tool for the gathering of income data. Section 3 provides some information on the technical issues of the FADN. In the last section we draw some conclusions