Author: J Christophe Bureau

Jean-Christophe Bureau completed his doctorate thesis at the University of Paris I (Panthéon-Sorbonne). He is professor of economics at AgroParisTech, Paris Institute of Technology, and works on agricultural policy and international trade. Jean-Christophe is a research associate at CEPII (Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales). He is deputy director of the INRA research unit in public economics (UMR INRA 210, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique) and vice president of the Economics and Social Sciences Department at AgroParisTech. Previously, he worked in different places including as a volunteer in Haïti for two years, at the Economic Research Service of the US Department of agricuture, at the OECD Secretariat, at Iowa State University and at the Institute for International Integration Studies at Trinity College in Dublin. He was scientific adviser at the Council for Economic Analysis of the French Prime Minister, in charge of agriculture and environment from 2002 to 2004.
Posted on

Does the WTO discipline really constrain the design of CAP payments?

This post is contributed by Jean-Christophe Bureau who is professor of of economics at AgroParisTech, Université of Paris-Saclay, and heads the joint research team in public economics of INRA, the National Institute for Agricultural Reseach in France.

The idea that the definition of CAP instruments has been (and still is) heavily constrained by World Trade Organisation rules is widespread. In debates on the post 2020 CAP, the issue of compatibility with WTO disciplines is raised each time coupled payments, countercyclical payments, support to production in less favoured areas, risk management or income stabilization schemes are discussed. An issue of particular interest (which this post focuses on) is environmental payments.

It is often stressed that WTO discipline imposes strict limitations in this area; in particular, that payments to farmers for environmental services need be limited to compensation of the additional costs experienced. This has important consequences for the design of the future CAP.… Read the rest

Posted on

The biodiversity consequences of killing Ecological Focus Areas

After the December 2012 Council proposed amendments, the vote of the agricultural committee of the European Parliament (COMAGRI) on January 24 2013 de facto kills any hope of deriving serious biodiversity benefit from the CAP reform. The COMAGRI amendments are particularly fatal to the Ecological Focus Area (EFA) measure, which is now nearly ‘as dead as a dodo’. The fact that the COMAGRI amendments largely restate the Agricultural Council’s draft position on the EFA leaves little hope for future debates between the Parliament and the Council. The conclusions of the European Council on February 8, 2013 can be seen as the burial of the EFA.
Many economists and think tanks doubted that the combination of Pillar 1 payments and green requirements was the most cost-efficient way to promote biodiversity and were not enthusiastic about the EFA idea. It is now time for them to realize that while Pillar 2 payments will be cut, Pillar 1 payments will be maintained but without any serious biodiversity requirement.… Read the rest

Posted on

The US Farm Bill: Lessons for CAP Reform ?

The current CAP reform debate and the US Farm Bill debate have been taking place in parallel for several months. There are some interesting contrasts between the two procedures, which are explored in a note for the European Parliament. The note also describes the current situation of the Farm Bill negotiations, based on the proposals tabled by the Senate and by the Committee of Agriculture of the House of Representatives (not endorsed by the House as a whole, so far).

It is difficult to compare the proposed €370 billion for 7 years in the CAP (a crude estimate based on recent budget proposals) with some US$ 690 billion, i.e €523 billion budget projected in the US Senate Farm Bill proposal for an equivalent period of time (1). Indeed, almost 80 percent of the US Farm Bill budget is devoted to nutrition programs such as food stamps and school lunches that benefit primarily to the urban poor and the unemployed.… Read the rest

Posted on

The European Parliament report on the measurement of farm support

A variety of estimates of the level of farm support circulate. Many of them rely on creative accounting. For example, during the recent farm bill debate in the US Senate on C-Span television, a Senator claimed that the EU subsidized its farmers seventeen times more than the US, quoting as “evidence” that farm subsidies accounted for 45% of the EU budget, while by contrast the US farm spending was less than 1% of the US federal budget. On the opposite, the Momagri (a French arable crops producers sponsored think tank) published estimates that US farm support was three times higher than the EU one. Defining meaningful indicators is important since, on both sides of the Atlantic, the fact that the other party supports its farmers is used as an excuse to maintain, increase or “re-couple” support. In the EU Parliament, for example, more and more MEPs seem to be arguing for maintaining support and even make it more countercyclical payments mostly because “the US does it”.… Read the rest

Posted on

French environmentalists try the rough way

This week, the French national federation of environmental NGOs, France Nature Environnement (FNE), federation of hundreds of environmental groups, launched a poster campaign that raised considerable controversy. It showed, in a rather shocking way, some (real or alledged) environmental damages caused by agriculture. Adding insult to injury, this took place a day before the annual “salon de l’agriculture”, a big national fair in Paris that attracts close to 1 million visitors and where every politician goes to cuddle farmers. All farmers’ organisations became mad, and claimed that the campaign indiscriminately accused farmers of being polluters. The French Minister of agriculture, Bruno Le Maire talked about “a scandal”. Opening the agricultural fair, President Nicolas Sarkozy said that the poster campaign was a “loathable”, and compared FNE (for some strange reason) to the National Front taking over ongoing debates on the status of islam. Probably under some political pressure, the Paris metro advertising branch refused to display the posters (invoking bizarre reasons like the need for Quentin Tarentino’s approval on the “kill bees” poster below…).… Read the rest

Posted on

Why are we so lousy at measuring farmers' incomes?

It has been heard and written everywhere for the last 18 months: farm incomes have gone down dramatically. After two years of carpet bombing by the media, with anything from 60 percent price fall in prices to desperate farmers spreading their milk in the fields, the consultation on the future of the CAP organized by Commissioner Ciolos suggest that many, in the civil society, are convinced that EU farmers are starving. As an external reviewer of the synthesis report of this consultation, I saw a large sample of individual contributions. My feeling is that for many people, the current low farm incomes justify subsidies, border protection and paying more attention to mechanisms to support farm prices. In France, the tone of the debates on the national agricultural law is such that for all journalists, and even more Members of Parliament, the current perception is that agriculture is a synonym for “lumpen proletariat”.… Read the rest

Posted on

Why are we so lousy at measuring farmers’ incomes?

It has been heard and written everywhere for the last 18 months: farm incomes have gone down dramatically. After two years of carpet bombing by the media, with anything from 60 percent price fall in prices to desperate farmers spreading their milk in the fields, the consultation on the future of the CAP organized by Commissioner Ciolos suggest that many, in the civil society, are convinced that EU farmers are starving. As an external reviewer of the synthesis report of this consultation, I saw a large sample of individual contributions. My feeling is that for many people, the current low farm incomes justify subsidies, border protection and paying more attention to mechanisms to support farm prices. In France, the tone of the debates on the national agricultural law is such that for all journalists, and even more Members of Parliament, the current perception is that agriculture is a synonym for “lumpen proletariat”.… Read the rest

Posted on

Does France really want to suspend agri-environmental measures?

The president of the main farmers’ union, the Fedération Nationale des Syndicats d’Exploitants Agricoles (FNSEA) Jean Michel Le Metayer called for “a pause in agri-environmental measures” and the suspension of new measures. For French speaking readers, the (short) video is here.

The Ministry of agriculture seems sympathetic with this position, even though Nicolas Sarkozy has recently positioned himself as greener than his predecessors, with initiatives under a framework law called the “Grenelle of the environment” and a carbon tax (it turns out that farmers should be exempted from paying this tax, eventually). The French minister Bruno Le Maire apparently said a few days after that, indeed, a revision of the agri-environmental measures (AEM) was necessary and that it should start with an inventory of the provisions adopted throughout the Union according to the newspaper Le Figaro. On January 13 Le Maire unveiled a proposal for a new agricultural law to be discussed by the Parliament with little apparent concern for the protection of the environment.… Read the rest

Posted on

"Notre Europe" brainstorming

The think tank “Notre Europe” just released a document on the future of the CAP. Notre Europe’s point of view is that because the health check (HC) is likely to lead mostly to short term adjustments, the “real” debate on the CAP is likely to take place before the next financial perspectives. The outcome could be very contingent to the situation that will prevail in 2013 (e.g. market situations). Notre Europe launched a reflexion that intends to look to more structural changes, with a longer term horizon than the HC.
All the members of the (large) task force did not share a common position on this issue and instead of producing a UN-type consensual document, two of the members, L.P. Mahé and I drafted our own conclusions, not necessarily shared by the others. I believe that many of the readers of this website will find the proposals a bit too “French” (even though the authors are considered as dangerous free marketers in their own country).… Read the rest

Posted on

“Notre Europe” brainstorming

The think tank “Notre Europe” just released a document on the future of the CAP. Notre Europe’s point of view is that because the health check (HC) is likely to lead mostly to short term adjustments, the “real” debate on the CAP is likely to take place before the next financial perspectives. The outcome could be very contingent to the situation that will prevail in 2013 (e.g. market situations). Notre Europe launched a reflexion that intends to look to more structural changes, with a longer term horizon than the HC.

All the members of the (large) task force did not share a common position on this issue and instead of producing a UN-type consensual document, two of the members, L.P. Mahé and I drafted our own conclusions, not necessarily shared by the others. I believe that many of the readers of this website will find the proposals a bit too “French” (even though the authors are considered as dangerous free marketers in their own country).… Read the rest