The CAP is often considered as a debate of the specialists since this is a very complex and technical topic, but nowadays there is a huge public debate on this policy which is one of the most important European policy and also one of the most expensive one. In May 2006 there was the biggest reform of the CAP with the adhesion of ten new countries which means there will be a new evaluation of the agricultural expending. This concept risks in restoring tensions between the Great Britain which wants to reduce its contributions and France which is largely been benefiting from this policy. Indeed, CAP seems to be too costly, it takes 40% of the European budget whereas there is only 2% of GDP and 3% of the active population concerned. The CAP is mainly based on measurement of subsidies in order to modernize agriculture.
[...] The CAP (and the common market) is also a way for France to get more opportunities: there are new possibilities of selling as there is more and more trade in the community of trade is done in the community). Moreover, the community preference illustrated by the target prices, is another protection against the foreign competition but also against the world fluctuation. This is another reason why the trade in the community is quickly developed. The European market is clearly disconnected of the world market, which is a protection for the French trade and French production as the European market is protected from the foreign importations. [...]
[...] Negative economic impacts of the CAP in France since 1992 The bad repartitions of the direct subsidies There are some bad impacts in the new CAP. First, the distribution of the European subsidies is pretty unfair and we have seen some farmer Unions' discontent. In France (and elsewhere in Europe), a minority of farmers (the biggest and the richest) benefits from most of subsidies: in France 60% of the farms benefits from 20% of the direct subsidies. In 2004, the French minister of Agriculture published for the first time the data concerning the main beneficiaries of the CAP subsidies on a total of the 9,5 billions of Euros attributed to France. [...]
[...] First because some countries don't agree such to a strong common policy (for example United Kingdom and Denmark had a strong tradition of free trade and didn't appreciate the interventionism of the CAP), due to the entry of more countries the system will become more complex which could result in regional differences. In 1984, the stocks were becoming a real issue and the CAP began to think about the quotas (in the milk sector) to reduce these stocks. It's true that the milk sector is a real problem since it's in this sector there are the more surpluses and expenditures of the expenditures of the EAGGF). [...]
[...] This aspect of the CAP isn't always positive because if most of farmers have changed for industry, this important “diminution” of the agricultural active population had also created unemployment in the countries, in France too. II- . To new learning What is changing in the CAP: a wave of reforms As we have seen in the first part, the CAP is a very protectionist policy which manage to put France, but also all the European community at the level of the United States in term of agriculture. [...]
[...] Positive economic impacts of the CAP in France since 1992 New CAP, same situation? France doesn't have to complain about the new situation of the CAP even if there is less advantage for it than in the past. Indeed between 1990 and 1997, the part of public subsidies in the agriculture had risen from 41 billions to 60 billions of francs (it was still in francs at this time, which means from 6 billions to 9 billions of Euros): the Mac Sharry reform wasn't for the farmer such a problem concerning the money they earn Moreover thanks to the CAP, France has a very strong and powerful food industry. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
