Does EU rural expenditure correspond to regional development needs? |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Muencheberg, Germany;2. Shenzhen Institute of Building Research, R&D Centre, Shenzhen, China;3. Agriculture and Food Economics, School of Agriculture and Food Science, University College Dublin, Ireland;1. College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing Institute of Technology, Nanjing, 211167, China;2. Key Laboratory of Low-grade Energy Utilization Technologies and Systems, Ministry of Education of PR China, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400044, China;3. Key Laboratory of Condition Monitoring and Control for Power Plant Equipment of Ministry of Education, North China Electric Power University, Baoding, 071003, China;4. Sichuan Baima CFB Demonstration Power Plant Co. Ltd., Neijiang, 641005, China;1. Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, BR-465, Km 7 Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, 23.897-000, Brazil;2. Federal University of Alfenas, Brazil;3. Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Brazil;4. Federal University of Lavras, Brazil;1. European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Economy Unit, Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3, 41092 Seville, Spain;2. Aragonese Agency for Research and Development (ARAID), Centre for Food Research and Technology (CITA), Government of Aragón, Unit of Agrifood Economics and Natural Resources, Avda. Montañana, 930, 50059 Zaragoza, Spain;3. University Loyola Andalusia, Department of Economics, Calle Energía Solar, 1, 41014 Palmas Altas, Seville, Spain;1. Democritus University of Thrace, School of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Department of Agricultural Development, Laboratory of Agricultural Policy and Cooperatives, Greece;2. Department of Bioeconomy and Systems Analysis, IUNG, Poland;3. Technological Education Institute (TEI) of Western Macedonia, Department of Agricultural Technology, Division of Agricultural Economics, Greece |
| |
| Abstract: | The EU offers a complex system of rural development interventions as part of its Common Agricultural Policy. A Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) has been developed for the programming period 2007–2013 in response to challenges faced with the evaluation of rural development measures in earlier programming periods.Statistical and multivariate analysis of CMEF baseline (regional characteristics) and input (expenditure) indicator data at the NUTS2 subdivision level is used to compare four typical expenditure allocation patterns (Competitiveness, Environment, Rural Viability, Equal Spending) in terms of associated regional characteristics and development trends.The results suggest expenditure priorities are generally in line with regional needs and that there are some positive development trends, for example higher increase of agricultural labour productivity in the Competitiveness Group, while for environmental topics the level of data required remains unsatisfactory for trend assessment. 17% of the regions have a budget allocation pattern deviating from other regions with similar characteristics, which could indicate ineffective priority setting. Consistent CMEF data over multiple programming periods would be desirable to support the relationships found and to facilitate time series analysis, but this seems questionable given that the European Commission has discontinued the CMEF in 2014 with further adaptations for the 2014–2020 programming period underway. |
| |
| Keywords: | Targeting Rural development Land use change |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
