The implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)-started in the early 1960s and soon became the object of a large array of criticisms. However, it was not until 1992 t~at a substantial reform was adopted, even th~ugh some sectorial me~sures had been undertaken before, in order to overcome surplus production and sharp budgetary crises. From 1992 to 2003, the CAP experienced three multi-sector wide-scope reforms, which implied a substantial shift in its policy instruments: the 199iMac Sharry reform, the 1999 Agenda 2000 reform and the 2003 Fischler reform. The aim of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of those CAP _reform processes, attempting to respond to three key questions: why did the reforms come to the political agenda at a given time; which factors were more determinant in influencing their final configurations; and why was the CAP mostly unchanged for thirty years, and then underwent almost a revolution in a short period ofless than fifteen years? Two different, and complementary, approaches will be adopted. t- The first consists of an eclectic political economy inspired analysis of the CAP reform processes on the basis of a structured framework. It is based on factual historic reports, published literature, and personal experience. Coherently with that framework, the analysis of each reform will consider three major points: the economic and social context; an overview of the reform process; and an assessment of the different factors that motivated the reform proposal and ofthose that influenced and determined its final configuration. The second approach consists of launching a two round Delphi process to gather the views of a panel of experienced players who took active part in the three reforms considered. As in the former approach, the aim is to get a live, first-hand, evaluation of what were the more influential factors in the two steps of the CAP policy-making process: the presentation of the proposals and the negotiation. The study concludes that CAP refonns occurred either in response to strong economic and political pressures taking place at a given time, or as a result of the reformist agenda of the ED Commission; and that the Agricultural Council is in general reluctant to accept reform but, once negotiations are underway, the active bargaining games taking place in the Council nonnally result in a weakening of the refonn proposals in order to accommodate the interests of the member states.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:486317 |
| Date | January 2007 |
| Creators | Cunha, Arlindo Marques |
| Publisher | University of Reading |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds