by
Roland E. Williams
Surbiton, Surrey
United Kingdom
FAO ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT PAPER - 142
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Rome, 1997
Paper prepared for the Agriculture and Economic
Development Analysis Division
FAO Economic and Social Department
|
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. |
M-60
ISBN 92-5-104080-X
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the reproduction, should be addressed to the Director, Information Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.
© FAO 1997
This paper studies the policy delivery systems (PDSs) in the European Union (EU) for the implementation of the common dairy policy. It looks carefully at the stated aims and objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the dairy policy at the PDS Itself and at the conduct of policy. The analysis is based on four objective performance criteria: effectiveness (in fulfilment of aims), efficiency enforceability and equity. Analysis of both the price support members. Three case-studies illustrate how the common policy had to be partially adapted in Italy and the United Kingdom because of differences In the market and processing industry structure and show how the high level of efficiency of the PDS in the Netherlands affects the system throughout the EU. It is argued that the system is broadly effective in achieving the target price and that since the introduction of the quota policy it has been more effective (unexpectedly) in fulfilling the EU's farm income alms. The policy has not been efficient at all times insofar as it encouraged overproduction of unwanted products with weak markets at supported prices. The policy has proved enforceable in its detail, although it has been necessary to rely on the European Court of Justice to settle difficult issues when political machinery has failed. In terms of equity the policy has strengthened the rural economy in some of the EU's more remote areas, but it has also tolerated large differences around common price levels. The author shows how the aims of policy have tended to shift over time. The largest shift has come with the 1992 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). which poses the biggest problem for the future of the EU dairy policy.
This electronic document has been scanned using optical character recognition (OCR) software and careful manual recorrection. Even if the quality of digitalisation is high, the FAO declines all responsibility for any discrepancies that may exist between the present document and its original printed version.
II. THE THEORY OF ECONOMIC POLICY ANALYSIS
III. THE DECISION-MAKING MACHINERY OF THE EU
IV. THE AIMS OF POLICY FOR AGRICULTURE AND THE MILK SECTOR
V. AN OUTLINE OF THE EU SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR MILK
VI. OTHER ASPECTS OF THE POLICY FOR THE MILK SECTOR
VII. THE IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK OF THE EU MILK SUPPORT SYSTEM
VIII. PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION AND CONDUCT OF POLICY
(A) The Implementation of Price Support
(B) The Implementation of Quotas
IX. PRACTICAL CONDUCT IN THREE MEMBER STATES
Italy
The United Kingdom
The Netherlands
X. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF POLICY
XI. WTO/GATT AND THE FUTURE OF MILK POLICY
Chronological List of EU Membership
ANNEX I. MANY A SLIP: STUDYING POLICY DELIVERY SYSTEMS¹
1. Introduction
2. The changing world of agricultural policy implementation
3. Agricultural policy implementation: The policy delivery system
4. Studying policy delivery systems: The structure-conduct-performance paradigm
5. Where next for studying policy delivery systems?
References