The capitalization of coupled and decoupled CAP payments into land rental rates

This article explores the extent to which payments under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are capitalized into land rents in Ireland with implications for the transfer efficiency of such payments, since subsidies may not benefit targeted recipients if they are capitalized into input prices. Capitalization in the years preceding and following the "decoupling" of agricultural support payments from agricultural production is explored. In the period prior to decoupling, direct support (Pillar 1) payments were highly capitalized into Irish agricultural rents (67–90 cents per euro of subsidies), while in the post‐decoupling period capitalization appears to have declined somewhat.     

Assessing the Impacts of Pillar 1 and 2 Subsidies on TFP in French Crop Farms

This article analyses the impact of common agricultural policy (CAP) subsidies on total factor productivity using a FADN dataset of French crop farms between 1996 and 2003. We first estimate a production function using a system GMM approach and then recover farm‐level total factor productivity (TFP). Further, the impact of Pillar 1 and 2 subsidies on TFP is investigated and results show that several subsidies have a negative impact on productivity during the period covered in the dataset. CAP reforms have also had an impact on the relationship between subsidies and productivity.     

The Capitalisation of CAP Payments into Land Rental Prices: A Panel Sample Selection Approach

The empirical literature suggests that farmland prices and rents capitalise agricultural subsidies and that the 2003 reform of the EU Common Agricultural Policy, which decoupled subsidies from production and attached them to land, may have increased the extent of the phenomenon. Employing a farm‐level dataset, the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) for Italy, we investigate this issue while accounting for selectivity, endogeneity and unobserved individual heterogeneity. To understand the impact of the reform we compare the estimates of capitalisation rate for decoupled payments with those for coupled payments. After correcting for unobserved individual heterogeneity and selectivity, our results reveal no capitalisation of coupled payments and only limited capitalisation of decoupled area payments into farmland rents in Italy.     

Farm Type Effects of an EU‐wide Direct Payment Harmonisation

In this study, we analyse how three scenarios involving different levels of harmonisation of common agricultural policy (CAP) decoupled payments in the EU affect the distribution of farm income across regions and farm types. We use the farm type extension of the common agricultural policy impact (CAPRI) model, which captures farm heterogeneity across the EU. The first scenario (NUTS1) assumes uniform per‐hectare payments at the NUTS1 level. The second scenario (MS‐CONV) equalises the per‐hectare rates inside each Member State (MS) and partially harmonises the single payment scheme (SPS) across MS in line with the 2011 Commission proposal. The third scenario simulates a uniform per‐hectare payment at the EU level. Depending on the implementation of the SPS, the NUTS1 flat rate induces a substantial redistribution of payments across farm types and NUTS2 regions, particularly in regions that apply the historical SPS. The MS‐CONV and EU flat‐rate schemes have more significant impacts at the EU‐wide level. In the EU‐15, almost all farms lose payments from MS‐CONV and EU‐wide flat rates, whereas in the EU‐10, almost all farm types gain from these scenarios. Our conservative estimates indicate that the flat‐rate payments could redistribute up to €8.5 billion. Lower land rental costs partially offset the losses of farm income in the EU‐15 from payment redistribution. Land rents drop for all flat‐rate scenarios across most sectors and farm sizes in the EU‐15. In the less productive new MS, the landowners’ rental income is largely unaffected by the introduction of the flat rate.     

CAP Subsidies and Productivity of the EU Farms

The paper investigates the impact of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidies on farm total factor productivity (TFP) in the European Union (EU). We employ a structural semi‐parametric estimation algorithm directly incorporating the effect of subsidies into a model of unobserved productivity. We empirically study the effects using the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) samples for the EU‐15 countries. Our main findings are clear: subsidies impact negatively on farm productivity in the period before the decoupling reform was implemented; after decoupling the effect of subsidies on productivity is more nuanced and in several countries it turned positive.     

Measuring the Trade Restrictiveness of Domestic Support using the EU Common Agricultural Policy as an Example

We develop an index that measures the overall trade effects of domestic support payments. Our index is based on the Mercantilist Trade Restrictiveness Index (MTRI) and is capable of analysing the development of the trade restrictiveness of domestic support payments over time and across countries. It facilitates the evaluation of agricultural policy reforms introducing changes in the composition of domestic support payments. We conduct this analysis with a computable general equilibrium model that is extended to depict detailed agricultural policies using the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union (EU) as an example. For the representation of agricultural policies, we updated the underlying database by incorporating detailed EU domestic support payments taken from the OECD Producer Support Estimate (PSE) tables and reconcile PSE data with the WTO classification scheme. Our index confirms a decrease in trade distortion stemming from the implementation of decoupled support in the EU. In addition, the trade-equivalent protection rate shows that the trade restrictiveness of domestic support payments depends on the assumptions made with regard to the degree of decoupling of those payments.     

Welfare implications of reduced government subsidies to farm families: accounting for fringe benefits

In the past three decades, farm families have relied on government payments and off‐farm income to reduce income risk and increase total household income. Studies have shown that, as the income effect dominates, government payments tend to reduce off‐farm labor of farm operators and spouses. But that may not be true if one accounts for fringe benefits associated with off‐farm employment. Additionally, with looming budget deficits and the possibility of a reduction in decoupled government payments, farm families may be facing an altered economic environment. Our study addresses this issue by examining the links between government farm program payments and the ever‐important role of fringe benefits in the off‐farm employment of farm couples. Results from farm‐level data actually show that the marginal effect of government payments on hours worked off‐farm will decrease in magnitude when accounting for fringe benefits, ceteris paribus. These results support the notion that farm households’ welfare loss stemming from reduced decoupled payments may be overstated when models exclude fringe benefits from the estimation of off‐farm labor supply.     

The Role of the Common Agricultural Policy in Enhancing Farm Income: A Dynamic Panel Analysis Accounting for Farm Size in Italy

As a multi-objective policy, the EU Common Agricultural Policy continues to secure significant income support for farmers as one of the nine specific objectives. We estimate the income transfer efficiency of a broad set of pivotal policy measures, focusing on the effects of farm structure on income transfer efficiency. We use dynamic modelling, based on a micro-data panel of Italian farms for the period 2008–2014, allowing for endogeneity, simultaneity bias, and omitted variables. In line with previous studies and economic expectations, we find that decoupled direct payments provide the highest contribution to agricultural incomes, followed by agri-environmental payments and on-farm investment subsidies. Coupled payments have no significant impacts on farmers’ income. Generally, for all analysed Common Agricultural Policy measures, large farms benefit from greater transfer efficiency levels compared with medium and small farms. These differences among instruments and across farms suggest that policy-participation costs may play a pivotal role, together with the economic structure of farms, in determining the income transfer efficiency of CAP policies.     

Impacts of Decoupled Agricultural Support on Farm Structure,Biodiversity and Landscape Mosaic: Some EU Results

The decoupling of direct payments from production represents a substantial reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Farmers are no longer required to produce commodities to be entitled to support but only to keep land in Good Environmental and Agricultural Condition. If output declines as a result, there is concern that landscape services produced jointly with commodities will also decline. The aim of this paper is to assess the long‐term effects of the 2003 reform on farm structure, landscape mosaic and biodiversity for a sample of EU regions. Impacts are quantified using a spatial agent‐based modelling approach by simulating agricultural development with links to indicators of landscape value. Our results demonstrate that eliminating the link between support payments and production has possible negative consequences for the landscape, but only under particular circumstances. It is shown that these effects could be offset by strengthening (Pillar II) agri‐environmental schemes. Further the single payment scheme results in higher land rental prices which reduces its ability to achieve its goal of providing income security for farmers. Implications of these results for the direction of continued CAP reform are discussed.     

Nonpecuniary Benefits to Farming: Implications for Supply Response to Decoupled Payments

We develop a household model wherein farmers allocate labor to maximize utility from leisure, consumption, and nonpecuniary benefits from farming. The model shows that farmers with decreasing marginal utility of income respond to higher decoupled payments by decreasing off-farm labor and increasing farm labor, resulting in greater agricultural output. We then estimate the difference between farm and off-farm returns to labor using data from three nationally representative farm household surveys. The finding of a large on-farm/off-farm wage differential provides compelling evidence of substantial nonpecuniary benefits from farming.     

农业保险对农业碳生产率的影响研究

目的 探究农业保险能否实现农业经济发展与碳减排“双促进”,进而提升农业碳生产率。方法 文章基于2008—2020年中国30个省（市、区,未含香港、澳门、台湾省和西藏地区）的面板数据,构建双向固定效应模型和中介效应模型,实证检验农业保险对农业碳生产率的影响及作用机制。结果 （1）农业保险有利于提升农业碳生产率,即农业保险发展水平每提高1%,农业碳生产率平均提升0.049%。（2）从作用机制来看,农业保险通过促进农业产业集聚和农业技术进步,从而实现农业碳生产率的提升,中介效应占比分别为39.1%和24.5%。（3）进一步讨论发现,农业保险对农业碳生产率的影响存在农业产值占比的单一门槛效应,门槛值为0.012 5,当农业产值占比低于门槛值时,农业保险对农业碳生产率的作用不明显,而当农业产值占比超过门槛值时,农业保险会对农业碳生产率产生显著的促进作用。结论 政府应从强化政策支持,提高保障水平;实行差异化补贴,推动规模化生产;完善保险条款,探索创新品种等方面进一步强化农业保险的环境正外部性。     

The Impact of Coupled and Decoupled Government Subsidies on Off-Farm Labor Participation of U.S. Farm Operators

With the 1996 Farm Act, the United States introduced payments that were designed to be "decoupled." Labor allocation choices are likely to be affected by receipt of payments, and income from off-farm jobs has been the major source of income for most farm households for sometime. This article examines whether the 1996 change has affected the off-farm labor participation of farm households. We conclude that the observed increase in off-farm participation of farm operators who received payments was not the result of the 1996 policy change. Government payments, whether coupled or decoupled, have a negative effect on off-farm labor participation.     

农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率的影响研究

[目的]农业劳动生产率的提高是中国农业现代化的重要特征,进一步探讨农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率的作用效果具有现实意义。[方法]文章基于2019年全国13省份玉米种植户调查数据,采用OLS回归模型与倾向得分匹配法,分析了农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率的影响效应,探讨影响效应在不同地形条件、兼业程度的组群差异,并考察了不同环节农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率的影响差异。[结果]（1）农机社会化服务正向显著影响农业劳动生产率,采纳农机社会化服务会促使农户农业劳动生产率显著提高18.8%。但农户采纳农机社会化服务的作用效果具有环节异质性。采纳耕整地、播种、灌溉排水和收获环节农机社会化服务会促使农户农业劳动生产率分别显著提高21.2%、17.4%、22.9%和18.3%;(2)而农户采纳植保环节农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率并不具有显著影响。农户采纳农机社会化服务对劳动生产率的影响效应还存在禀赋差异,平地农户采纳农机社会化服务使其农业劳动生产率显著提高21.9%,而坡地山地农户采纳农机社会化服务对农业劳动生产率没有表现出显著的影响。（3）纯农业户与兼业农户采纳农机社会化服务都会对农业劳动生产率产...     

要素市场扭曲对农业全要素生产率空间影响效应分解研究

目的 通过对要素市场扭曲下的农业全要素生产率的系统分析,以期为提升农业全要素生产率以及要素市场改革进程中的中国农业可持续发展提供参考。方法 文章基于资本、劳动力、土地等要素市场严重扭曲的事实,利用1997—2018年中国28个省（ 市、自治区）面板数据,通过构建空间计量模型检验要素市场扭曲对农业全要素生产率的空间影响及其溢出效应。结果 中国资本市场、劳动力市场、土地等要素市场扭曲度比较高,同时呈现显著地区差异;中国农业全要素生产率增长以技术进步驱动为主,大多数省份的技术效率不高,同时呈现出东部地区高于中西部地区的区域不平衡特点;要素市场扭曲对农业全要素生产率的影响为负,资本市场、劳动力市场、土地等要素市场扭曲在一定程度上阻碍农业全要素生产率的提升;要素市场扭曲对全要素生产率具有一定的空间溢出效应,也在一定程度抑制了全要素生产率增长。结论 考虑要素市场扭曲对农业全要素生产率影响的空间分析,更能客观反映当前不断深化的农业农村改革发展所引发的地区差距,应充分重视要素市场扭曲对农业全要素生产率的空间溢出效应,通过要素市场化改革,持续加大涉农政策调整,不断加大对农业农村生产经营的金融资源投入,逐步实现农业全要素生产率的全面提升。     

The Challenge of Decoupling Agricultural Support

The Challenge of Decoupling Agricultural Support
Decoupling agricultural support has become a central feature of reforms in most OECD countries due to international and domestic constraints. There is evidence that this movement can reduce economic inefficiencies and contribute to improving policy design. Not all the characteristics, however, of recent new support programmes, reduce their impact on production. Moving from price support to area payments and granting more freedom in the use of the supported resources makes programmes more decoupled, but making payments counter-cyclical based on current production or market variables tends to exacerbate the production response of risk averse farmers. When all the effects are taken into consideration - relative prices, risk and dynamic effects - all agricultural support programmes have some impact on production and thus the degree of decoupling needs to be estimated empirically. Recent studies have expanded our scarce knowledge of these issues. They confirm the partial decoupling of area payments, like those in the EU after 1992, as well as the larger degree of decoupling that results from more production freedom, as in the Production Flexibility Contract payments in the US and the recent Single Farm Payment in the EU. But the total magnitude of the production effects depends on policy design and 'size', since high levels of partially decoupled support can have potentially significant effects on production.     

The impact of decoupled payments on U.S. cropland values

An extensive literature has shown that various farm programs may influence the value of farmland, but other studies have not examined the cropland price effects of direct, or decoupled, payments separate from countercyclical payments. This study uses nationally representative confidential field‐level panel data with farmer‐reported per‐acre land values. We analyze the impact of decoupled and other farm program payments on farmland values. Using a fixed effects model and controlling for various factors that influence farmland values, we find that an additional dollar of decoupled payments has a large and statistically significant impact on farmland values of about $18 per acre. These results are comparable with similar studies undertaken in Europe.     

Setting Climate Action as the Priority for the Common Agricultural Policy: A Simulation Experiment

We quantitatively assess the impacts of re-allocating budgetary resources within Pillar 1 of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from direct income support to a direct greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction subsidy for EU farmers. The analysis is motivated by the discussion on the future CAP, with calls for both an increased ambition on climate action from the agricultural sector and for a more incentive-based delivery system of direct payments under strict budgetary restrictions. By conducting a simulation experiment with an agricultural partial equilibrium model (CAPRI), we are able to factor in farmers’ supply and technology-adjusting responses to the policy change and to estimate the potential uptake of the GHG-reduction subsidy in EU regions. We find that a budget-neutral re-allocation of financial resources towards subsidised emission savings can reduce EU agricultural non-CO₂ emissions by 21% by 2030, compared to a business-as-usual baseline. Two-thirds of the emission savings are due to changes in production levels and composition, implying that a significant part of the achieved GHG reduction is offset globally by emission leakage. At the aggregated level, the emission-saving subsidy and increased producer prices compensate farmers for the foregone direct income support, but differences in regional impacts indicate accelerated structural change and heterogeneous income effects in the farm population. We conclude that the assumed regional budget-neutrality condition introduces inefficiencies in the incentive system, and the full potential of the EU farming sector for GHG emissions reduction is not reached, leaving ample room for the design of more efficient agricultural policies for climate action.     

The Varying Impacts of Agricultural Support Programs on U.S. Farm Household Consumption

Farm households are economic agents whose income is derived from farm, off-farm, and government sources. This article uses farm-level data from the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) and recent advances in the econometric theory of dynamic pseudo-panels to show that farm households consume various sources of income differently at the margin. Particular attention is given to a specific type of lump-sum government transfer payment intended to be decoupled from (independent of) farm production decisions. The results suggest that relatively decoupled government subsidies have a greater marginal effect on farm household consumption than subsidies that are tied to market conditions.     

农旅融合对农业劳动生产率影响的实证检验——以全国休闲农业与乡村旅游示范县为例

[目的]基于产业融合视角,探讨农旅融合对农业劳动生产率的影响,从而为我国推动农业现代化发展和实施乡村振兴战略提供实证支撑。[方法]文章运用2010—2017年中国地级市面板数据,构建面板计量模型,检验农旅融合对农业劳动生产率的影响及其作用机制,并且检验城镇化是否发挥门槛作用。[结果]（1）农旅融合有助于提高农业劳动生产率,并且影响效果存在显著的区域异质性。（2）东部地区和非农业大市的农旅融合对提高农业劳动生产率的效果较好,显著为正。（3）农旅融合通过促进劳动力非农转移和土地规模化经营的作用路径提高农业劳动生产率。（4）农旅融合与农业劳动生产率之间存在城镇化的单一门槛效应,门槛值为0.54,即当城镇化水平高于门槛值时,农旅融合促进农业劳动生产率的作用才会显现。[结论]建议继续推荐示范县评选,实现农业高质量发展;充分重视区域差异性,推行差异化发展策略;积极推行土地流转政策和培育新型经营主体政策;创新农旅融合与城镇化的耦合发展机制等等,以期推动农旅融合高质量发展。