[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/eurcho/v20y2021i3p42-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Economic Experiments Contribute to a More Effective CAP?

Author

Listed:
  • Marianne Lefebvre
  • Jesus Barreiro‐Hurlé
  • Ciaran Blanchflower
  • Liesbeth Colen
  • Laure Kuhfuss
  • Jens Rommel
  • Tanja Šumrada
  • Fabian Thomas
  • Sophie Thoyer
Abstract
In order to keep pace with the evolution of the objectives and means of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, evaluation tools also need to adapt. A set of tools that have proved highly effective in other policy fields is economic experiments. These allow the testing of a new policy before its implementation, provide evidence of its specific effects, and identify behavioural dimensions that can influence policy outcomes. We argue that agricultural policy should be subject to economic experiments, providing examples to illustrate how they can inform CAP design. We identify the additional efforts needed to establish further proof‐of‐concept, by running more – and more robust – experiments related to the CAP. This can happen only by integrating experimental evaluation results within the policy cycle and addressing ethical and practical challenges seriously. To do so, researchers would benefit from a concerted European effort to promote the methodology across the EU; organise the replication in time and across Europe of experiments relevant for the CAP; and build a multi‐national panel of farmers willing to participate in experiments. Steps are being taken in this direction by the Research Network of Economics Experiments for CAP evaluation (REECAP). Face à l'évolution des objectifs et des moyens de la politique agricole commune de l'Union européenne, les outils d'évaluation doivent également s'adapter. Les expérimentations économiques sont un ensemble d'outils qui se sont avérés très efficaces dans d'autres domaine d’action des pouvoirs publics. Elles permettent de tester une nouvelle politique avant sa mise en œuvre, fournissent des informations sur les effets spécifiques de cette politique et identifient les dimensions comportementales qui peuvent influencer ses résultats. Nous soutenons que la politique agricole devrait être l’objet d’expérimentations économiques et fournissons des exemples pour illustrer comment celles‐ci peuvent éclairer la formulation de la PAC. Nous identifions les efforts supplémentaires nécessaires pour établir d'autres preuves de concept, en menant des expérimentations liées à la PAC plus nombreuses ‐ et plus robustes. Cela ne peut se faire qu'en intégrant les résultats des évaluations expérimentales dans le cycle de la politique et en s'attaquant sérieusement aux défis éthiques et pratiques. Pour ce faire, les chercheurs bénéficieraient d'un effort européen concerté pour promouvoir la méthodologie à travers l'Union européenne ; organiser la réplication dans le temps et à travers l'Europe d'expérimentations pertinentes pour la PAC ; et constituer un panel multinational d'agriculteurs désireux de participer à ces expérimentations. Des mesures sont prises dans ce sens par le Réseau de recherche sur les expérimentations économiques pour l'évaluation de la PAC (REECAP). Um mit der Weiterentwicklung der Ziele und Maßnahmen der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik (GAP) mithalten zu können, müssen auch die Evaluierungsmethoden angepasst werden. Eine Methode, welche bereits in anderen Politikbereichen sehr effektiv eingesetzt werden konnte, sind ökonomische Experimente. Diese bieten die Möglichkeit, eine neue Politik vor ihrer Umsetzung zu testen. Sie liefern Erkenntnisse über ihre spezifische Wirkung und identifizieren Verhaltensbereiche, die die Ergebnisse der Politik beeinflussen können. Aus unserer Sicht sollte die Agrarpolitik Gegenstand von ökonomischen Experimenten sein. Wir zeigen anhand von Beispielen, wie diese zur Gestaltung der GAP beitragen können. Darüber hinaus weisen wir auf zusätzlich Anstrengungen hin, die für einen weiteren Machbarkeitsnachweis erforderlich sind, nämlich die Durchführung von mehr ‐ und robusteren ‐ Experimenten in Bezug auf die GAP. Dies kann nur durch die Einbindung von experimentellen Evaluationsergebnissen in den Politikablauf und die ernsthafte Auseinandersetzung mit ethischen und praktischen Herausforderungen umgesetzt werden. Um dieses Ziel zu erreichen, wäre es für die Forschung sinnvoll, wenn eine konzertierte europäische Initiative die Methode in der gesamten EU verbreiten würde. Die Initiative müsste auch die zeitliche und europaweite Wiederholung der auf die GAP bezogenen Experimente organisieren. Des Weiteren müsste ein multinationales Panel an Landwirtinnen und Landwirten aufgebaut werden, die bereit wären, an den Experimenten teilzunehmen. Schritte in diese Richtung werden bereits vom Forschungsnetzwerk für Ökonomische Experimente für die GAP‐Evaluierung (REECAP) unternommen.

Suggested Citation

  • Marianne Lefebvre & Jesus Barreiro‐Hurlé & Ciaran Blanchflower & Liesbeth Colen & Laure Kuhfuss & Jens Rommel & Tanja Šumrada & Fabian Thomas & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Can Economic Experiments Contribute to a More Effective CAP?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(3), pages 42-49, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:3:p:42-49
    DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12324
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1746-692X.12324?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sophie Thoyer & Raphaële Préget, 2019. "Enriching the CAP evaluation toolbox with experimental approaches: introduction to the special issue," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 347-366.
    2. Timothy N. Cason & Steven Y. Wu, 2019. "Subject Pools and Deception in Agricultural and Resource Economics Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 743-758, July.
    3. Luc Behaghel & Karen Macours & Julie Subervie, 2019. "How can randomised controlled trials help improve the design of the common agricultural policy?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 473-493.
    4. Fabian Thomas & Estelle Midler & Marianne Lefebvre & Stefanie Engel, 2019. "Greening the common agricultural policy: a behavioural perspective and lab-in-the-field experiment in Germany," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 367-392.
    5. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(4), pages 667-694, December.
    6. Alexander Gocht & Pavel Ciaian & Maria Bielza & Jean-Michel Terres & Norbert Röder & Mihaly Himics & Guna Salputra, 2017. "EU-wide Economic and Environmental Impacts of CAP Greening with High Spatial and Farm-type Detail," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 651-681, September.
    7. Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Schulz, Norbert & Breustedt, Gunnar, 2014. "Assessing Farmers' Willingness to Accept "Greening": Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Gremany," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170560, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. Morawetz, Ulrich B. & Tribl, Christoph, 2020. "Randomised Controlled Trials for the Evaluation of the CAP: Empirical Evidence about Acceptance by Farmers," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(3), July.
    9. Norbert Schulz & Gunnar Breustedt & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2014. "Assessing Farmers' Willingness to Accept “Greening”: Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 26-48, January.
    10. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(4), pages 667-694, December.
    11. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    12. Kamel Louhichi & Pavel Ciaian & Maria Espinosa & Angel Perni & Sergio Gomez y Paloma, 2018. "Economic impacts of CAP greening: application of an EU-wide individual farm model for CAP analysis (IFM-CAP)," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(2), pages 205-238.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    2. Daniele Curzi & Sylvain Chabé‐Ferret & Salvatore Di Falco & Laure Kuhfuss & Marianne Lefebvre & Alan Matthews, 2022. "Using Experiments to Design and Evaluate the CAP: Insights from an Expert Panel," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 28-34, August.
    3. Tobias Dalhaus & Linda Steinhübel & Bernhard Dalheimer & Liesbeth Colen, 2024. "The future of research on sustainable food systems: Building an early‐career network of agricultural economists in Europe," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 319-324, April.
    4. Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Dessart, Francois J. & Rommel, Jens & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Thomas, Fabian & Zagorska, Katarzyna, 2023. "Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandre Sauquet, 2021. "Ex-post analysis of the crop diversification policy ofthe CAP Greening in France," Working Papers hal-03455548, HAL.
    2. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    3. Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Dessart, Francois J. & Rommel, Jens & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Thomas, Fabian & Zagorska, Katarzyna, 2023. "Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Jean-Marc Blazy & Julie Subervie & Jacky Paul & François Causeret & Loic Guinde & Sarah Moulla & Alban Thomas & Jorge Sierra, 2020. "Ex ante assessment of the cost-effectiveness of Agri-Environmental Schemes promoting compost use to sequester carbon in soils in Guadeloupe," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02748634, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    5. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    6. Gruner, Sven & Lehberger, Mira & Hirschauer, Norbert & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(03), January.
    7. Daniele Curzi & Sylvain Chabé‐Ferret & Salvatore Di Falco & Laure Kuhfuss & Marianne Lefebvre & Alan Matthews, 2022. "Using Experiments to Design and Evaluate the CAP: Insights from an Expert Panel," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 28-34, August.
    8. Julia Höhler & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Mikołaj Czajkowski & François J. Dessart & Paul J. Ferraro & Tongzhe Li & Kent D. Messer & Leah Palm‐Forster & Mette Termansen & Fabian Thomas & Katarzyna Zagórsk, 2024. "Perspectives on stakeholder participation in the design of economic experiments for agricultural policymaking: Pros, cons, and twelve recommendations for researchers," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(1), pages 338-359, March.
    9. Buchholz, Matthias & Danne, Michael & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "An experimental analysis of German farmers’ decisions to buy or rent farmland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Blazy, J.-M. & Subervie, J. & Paul, J. & Causeret, F. & Guindé, L. & Moulla, S. & Thomas, A. & Sierra, J., 2021. "Ex-ante assessment of the cost-effectiveness of public policies to sequester carbon in soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    11. Morawetz, Ulrich B. & Tribl, Christoph, 2020. "Randomised Controlled Trials for the Evaluation of the CAP: Empirical Evidence about Acceptance by Farmers," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(3), July.
    12. Marie Ferré & Stefanie Engel & Elisabeth Gsottbauer, 2023. "External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 661-685, September.
    13. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    14. Jens Rommel & Julian Sagebiel & Marieke Cornelia Baaken & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Douadia Bougherara & Luigi Cembalo & Marija Cerjak & Tajana Čop & Mikołaj Czajkowski & María Espinosa‐Goded & Julia Höh, 2023. "Farmers' risk preferences in 11 European farming systems: A multi‐country replication of Bocquého et al. ()," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 1374-1399, September.
    15. Luc Behaghel & Karen Macours & Julie Subervie, 2019. "How can randomised controlled trials help improve the design of the common agricultural policy?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 473-493.
    16. Lakes, Tobia & Garcia-Marquez, Jaime & Müller, Daniel & Lakner, Sebastian & Pe’er, Guy, 2020. "How green is greening? A fine-scale analysis of spatio-temporal dynamics in Germany," FORLand Working Papers 17 (2020), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    17. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    18. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Luc Behaghel & Karen Macours & Julie Subervie, 2018. "Can RCTs help improve the design of CAP," Working Papers hal-01974425, HAL.
    20. Hannus, Veronika & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "It is not only about money —– German farmers' preferences regarding voluntary standards for farm sustainability management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:eurcho:v:20:y:2021:i:3:p:42-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.