Increasing EU Spending on Environmental Management and Rural Development from 2008-2013
Submitting Institution
Newcastle UniversityUnit of Assessment
Agriculture, Veterinary and Food ScienceSummary Impact Type
EnvironmentalResearch Subject Area(s)
Economics: Applied Economics
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration, Sociology
Summary of the impact
The UK's decision to introduce voluntary modulation led directly from
research conducted at Newcastle University between 1993 and 2008 which
demonstrated conclusively that broadening the scope of Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidies beyond supporting agricultural
production through `modulation' would greatly benefit the environment and
rural economies. The success of modulation in the UK then led to
compulsory modulation being introduced throughout the European Union
(EU). Up to 2013 modulation has generated outstanding impacts by providing
more than €10 billion of new funding for environmental management and
rural development across the EU.
Underpinning research
Background
In 1997, the CAP was in need of reform as it faced severe criticism for
failing to incorporate social and environmental priorities for rural
areas. Some of these reforms would be embodied in the EU's Agenda 2000
objectives which explicitly established economic, social, and
environmental goals within a new reformulated set of objectives for the
CAP. In particular these reforms introduced a new rural development policy
as a second pillar of the CAP, helping to integrate environmental concerns
into agricultural policy while at the same time developing the vitality of
rural areas. Research from Newcastle University in the late 1990s
supported the aims of Agenda 2000.
Research
Staff at Newcastle University, particularly Professor Philip Lowe
(Professor of Rural Economy: 1991 to date), Dr Neil Ward (Research
Associate: 1993 - 1995; Lecturer: 1995 - 1999; Senior Lecturer: 1999 -
2001; Professor: 2001; Professor & Director: 2004 - 2008) and Dr
Katherine Falconer (Research Associate and Lecturer: 1997 - 2001)
undertook research projects [G1, G2 and G3] that
helped in the development of these environmental and social aspects of CAP
reform and supported the introduction of modulation (the partial transfer
of CAP payments from the support of agriculture to the support of other
rural activities) as a means of transferring a proportion of the EU's
farming subsidies into funding for the environment and rural development.
The Newcastle researchers argued that a coordinated agricultural support,
adjustment and conservation strategy was needed within the CAP, along with
an end to competition between these components. They concluded that
modulation was one means by which progress could be made without requiring
a fundamental break with policy traditions. They concluded that modulation
had the ability to correct distortions in agricultural strategy, while
stimulating further, faster, and deeper change in current agricultural
systems, therefore allowing them to move further towards achieving
socially beneficial goals. They further suggested that the approach could
be applied in a gradual, evolutionary manner that redirected agricultural
policy over the longer term. The findings of this research were
disseminated through academic journal articles [P1 — P3]
and more directly to stakeholders and policy makers through secondment,
workshops, reports and working papers.
This research (i) enabled UK agencies to develop a new model for rural
support measures to maximise the environmental benefits of agricultural
policy reforms and (ii) identified the best means of promoting ideas to
support Agenda 2000 in combining environmental and agricultural objectives
and relating these to the implementation of wider rural policy.
References to the research
[P1] Falconer, K. and Ward, N. (2000) Using modulation to green
the CAP: The UK case, Land Use Policy , 17 , 269-277
[P2] Lowe, P. and Ward, N. (1998a) Regional policy, CAP reform and
rural development in Britain: The challenge for New Labour, Regional
Studies 32, 469-74.
[P3] Ward, N (1999) The 1999 reforms of the Common Agricultural
Policy and the environment, Environmental Politics, 8, 168-73.
Grants
[G1] The Impact of the Agenda 2000 Proposals on Rural England (May
1998) A Rural Development Commission-funded study of the impact of the
Agenda 2000 proposals on rural England, and the implications for reforms
to the machinery of rural governance within the UK. (£5,000). Phillip Lowe
P.I.
[G2] Integrating the Environment into European Rural Policy Reform
(Oct 1998 - Jan 1999): A study funded by the Land Use Policy Group of the
British countryside agencies (Countryside Commission, English Nature, SNH
& CCW, Environment Agency) of the arrangements for environmental
protection in the context of the 1999 Common Agricultural Policy reform
(£14,000). Phillip Lowe P.I.
[G3] Government Objectives for England's Rural Economies (Feb —
Aug 1999) Cabinet Office-funded (Performance & Innovation Unit),
six-month secondment to serve as the academic specialist on a project for
the Prime Minister reviewing government policy for England's rural
economies (£20,000). Neil Ward P.I.
Details of the impact
Newcastle University research conducted between 1998 and 2000 has
underpinned a change in the way that the EU allocates funds for rural
development and biodiversity conservation. In the period 2007 to 2013
€20.3 billion (£17.6 billion) have been allocated towards agri-environment
measures, including measures which promote biodiversity such as the NATURA
2000 measures, [E1]. This represents 48% of global aid spending to
biodiversity in the same period [E1]. This level of spending on
environmental and other measures could not have been possible without the
European wide implementation of modulation which from 2008 to 2013 was
responsible for approximately €10.45 billion (£8.84 billion) of additional
spending on rural development measures [E2]. In England modulation
helps to fund the Environmental Stewardship scheme, the entry level of
which is open to all farmers. Modulation supports additional spending on
similar rural development programmes in the rest of the UK and across an
additional 14 EU countries. Research carried out on behalf of the EU [E4]
has recognised that the overall "impacts of modulation on the
environment are positive for all environmental parameters" and that
"these positive impacts are the result of the availability of
additional funds within Pillar 2 and relate to a whole range of measures
across all four Axes". However, it is acknowledged that the extent
of these impacts is "hard to quantify beyond general terms" [E4].
Route to impact
From 2000, the Rural Development Regulation (Regulation (EC) 1257/1999)
gave EU states the option of introducing a process called `modulation'
into how they spent their CAP budgets. Modulation works by reducing the
direct payments made to farmers under Pillar 1 of the CAP (used to
subsidise agricultural production), with some of the savings being
transferred to Pillar 2 of the CAP where it pays for measures to support
environmental management and rural development.
The research on the impacts of modulation produced by Newcastle
University was promoted through direct interaction with policy makers at a
UK cabinet level. Ward was seconded to the Prime Minister's
Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) in the Cabinet Office to
review rural and agricultural policy and to advise the Prime Minister and
other key ministers directly on how the government should pursue CAP
reform in the UK. This advocacy convinced the UK Government to take a lead
in switching hundreds of millions of pounds from production subsidies to
environmental payments. This decision had required a U-turn from the then
Agriculture Minister, who in February 1999, prior to Ward's secondment to
the PIU, had declared that the UK was `not minded' to introduce modulation
(House of Commons Agriculture Committee 1999, para.114). The influence of
Newcastle University research is reflected in the following quotes from
the then Minister of Agriculture "I remain grateful for the research
undertaken by Newcastle University's Centre for Rural Economy on the
potential impacts on environmental management and rural development of a
policy of modulation of CAP payments. Newcastle University were pioneers
of this development in the late 1990's. The research that was undertaken
by Professor Philip Lowe and Dr Neil Ward helped inform policy within
the Ministry of Agriculture and later on within Government more
generally" [E7]. The adoption of modulation "... has led
to a significant restructuring of the CAP. As a reform it is far more
sustainable than the regime it came to replace. That's quite an
achievement but I don't think we would have got there without being able
to back our point up with the evidence and arguments provided by
Newcastle University's early research." [E7]
The UK's early and voluntary adoption of modulation, based on the
findings of Newcastle University's research, set a new and more radical
course for Europe in redirecting the financing of the CAP during
subsequent reforms, opening much wider opportunities for the CAP to
support environmental and rural development objectives which would lead to
substantially increased budgets (releasing additional funds in excess of
€10 billion, £8.46 billion) for environmental management and rural
development through the period between 2005 and 2013. The broader impacts
of the Newcastle University research is illustrated by the following
quotes from the then Agriculture Minister and a senior figure in the rural
policy community "The Newcastle University research was invaluable in
informal meetings with other Agricultural Ministers in helping convince
them that modulation, and indeed the very existence of a second pillar,
was a viable way forward for the CAP." [E7]
Newcastle's "...research played a highly influential role in providing
the evidence and rationale for a major shift in the UK Government's
position on modulation and subsequently in adoption of mandatory
modulation by EU member states during reform of the Common Agricultural
Policy. This was helped by the quality of [Newcastle University's]
connections in the policy community and the effective dissemination and
promotion of its research." [E8]
The impact in the period 2008 - 2013
The CAP Reforms of 2003 (the Mid-Term Review) stipulated that direct
payments over €5000 (£4229) to farmers in the EU-15 (the fifteen EU
members states before the accession of 10 new members in 2004) would be
decreased by 3%, 4% and 5% respectively from 2005, 2006, 2007, staying at
5% for the following years. At a 5% rate, modulation across the EU-15 led
to an annual transfer of about €1.2 billion (£1.02 billion) (in current
prices) [E2] from the production subsidies to rural development and
environmental schemes. From 2010 modulation rates increased progressively
to 7%, 8%, 9% and 10% for 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively. This
increase led to a net additional transfer from the first pillar to the
second of €3.25 billion (£2.75 billion) (2010: €0.48 billion (£0.41
billion); 2011: €0.69 billion (£0.52 billion); 2012: €0.91 billion (£0.77
billion); 2013: €1.2 billion (£1.02 billion) [E2].
Specific examples of the benefit of increased spending on the environment
include increased bird densities. A winter survey of seed-eating birds in
two areas of England by the RSPB during winter 2007-2008 found that wild
seed mixture crops supported the highest densities of seed-eating birds E3].
Similarly Baker et al. (2012) [E5] examined how uptake of the
English Environmental Stewardship scheme links to changes in national
farmland bird populations from 2002-2010, finding evidence for positive
effects on biodiversity of nationally implemented agri-environment
schemes. A review financed by the Commission of European Communities
(Poláková et al., 2011) [E6] summarised evidence of the impacts on
biodiversity and habitat creation of spending on agri- environment
measures under Pillar 2 of CAP up to 2011 and concluded that "the
biodiversity status of agricultural habitats subject to agri-environment
measures is significantly better than would have been the case if the
policy had not been in place" (Executive Summary pp xxi).
Sources to corroborate the impact
[E1] European Commission, `Communication from the Commission to
the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the
Committee of the Regions: A Mid-Term Assessment of Implementing the EC
Biodiversity
(http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/comm2006/pdf/bap_2008_en.pdf)
[E2]
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/direct-support/pdf/factsheet-modulation_en.pdf
[E3] Agri-environment schemes in England 2009 A review of results
and effectiveness. Natural England
[E4] LEI and IEEP (2009) `Study on the economic, social and
environmental impact of the modulation provided for in Article 10 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003'. Report for EC Directorate General
for Agriculture and Rural Development.
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/modulation/fullreport_en.pdf
[E5] Baker, D. J., Freeman, S. N., Grice, P. V. and Siriwardena,
G. M. (2012), `Landscape-scale responses of birds to agri-environment
management: a test of the English Environmental Stewardship scheme'.
Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 871-882.
[E6] Poláková, J., Tucker, G., Hart, K., Dwyer, J. and Rayment, M.
(2011) Addressing biodiversity and habitat preservation through measures
applied under the Common Agricultural Policy. Institute for European
Environmental Policy, London.
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/biodiversity-protection/full_text_en.pdf
[E7] Former UK Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
[E8] Former Policy Director of Campaign to Protect Rural England
and subsequently Director of Strategy and External Affairs at the National
Trust