1. Changing EU frameworks, the Common Agricultural Policy and rural development Dr Janet Dwyer, Reader in Rural Studies, University of Gloucestershire

2. Outline Changing EU policy frameworks: Cohesion policy and CAP The New CAP: first and second pillars EU Rural Development: what are we trying to do? and lessons from Salzburg Where next? – future challenges and opportunities

3. Cohesion Policy and Rural Development Focus upon helping to promote economic convergence and reduce disparities across the EU To date, principally delivered through joint- funded, territorially based, multiannual programmes (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF) Rural element of varying importance, by territory and classification Very important influence in some MS, much less in others

4. The Changing Cohesion Agenda Enlargement shifts both average EU levels of economic performance and range of situations: accession states become the clear priority Multi-annual territorial programme funds (ERDF dominated) will mainly move east, 2007- More widespread funds for ‘competition’ but mainly urban focus, smaller budget ‘New deal’ for second pillar of CAP to pick up rural development policy – whole territory scope, agriculture / forestry link remains, but funds can go beyond the farm gate

5. Changing rationale for support: From specialised food production to ‘multifunctionality’ From ‘logique de guichet’ to ‘logique de contrat’ The Changing Policy Agenda for CAP

6. The New CAP (from 2004) Market support increasingly decoupled and limited / targeted to special needs New environmental conditions on all decoupled payments – may require regional definition Rural Development as the second pillar, gradually strengthening through modulation Future delivery of all, through a single fund

7. CAP: The New First Pillar Increasing share of support given as ‘single farm payment’ (SFP) – regardless of what is produced National and regional variations on the basic model (coverage of SFP, basis of payment, targeted envelopes) Variable, tailored environmental conditions Divergent and less predictable outcomes - this pillar is becoming more nationalised / regionalised

8. CAP: the New Second Pillar Three themes – 1.Improving competitiveness in agriculture – investment, diversification, training, processing and marketing, quality 2.Environmental land management – environmental schemes, LFA support, forestry and forest management 3.Support for the broader rural economy – rural infrastructure, services, tourism and crafts, IRD partnerships, village renewal, (? training and marketing)

9. CAP: The New Second Pillar Simplified structure – fewer chapters and measures, broader scope than RDR (1257/1999) More scope for flexibility Mainstreaming of LEADER Modest budget increase for 2007-13

10. EU Rural Development: What are we trying to do? Address rural market imperfections, linked to: High transaction costs, lack of information, fragmented knowledge/resources Human capacity barriers – lack of skills, confidence, averse attitudes to risk Lack of access to capital Provide public goods - environmental and socio- cultural, not reflected in markets Stimulate rural economies through public investment – helping rural areas to help themselves

11. EU Rural Development: Lessons from Salzburg Competitiveness: Many second pillar policies remain farm-focused, centralised, capitalised Environment: need to clarify outcomes, increase flexibility of measures, develop better monitoring and demonstrate success, integrate with sustainable development Rural economy: the measures offer great potential to strengthen links between land-based and other sectors and promote enhanced human and social capital in rural areas, but they are under-used

12. EU Rural Development: Lessons from Salzburg (cont) Bottom-up approaches, involving different actors and expertise (economy, environment, community) in planning and delivery, can produce popularity, flexibility and innovation Essential ingredients: -partnership -ownership -accessibility -developing human and social capital -integration of measures

13. Lessons from Salzburg (cont) We urgently need simplification ….. But Also We need the ability to articulate EU, national and regional priorities, and to ensure financial probity through the system – this means transparency at both ends, timeliness, trust and support The dialogue between levels needs to focus on agreeing and measuring outcomes (essentials and ambitions), principles and processes, not details of ‘tools’ and ‘rules’

14. Where next? – future challenges and opportunities Encourage more bottom-up approaches through pilots, or mainstreaming LEADER, and bringing cohesion experience into the new second pillar (eg PRODER, NRDP Ireland, Regionen Aktiv, Danish Art 33, PITs and RIPs) Shift more resources into developing human and social capital – training, advice, farmer and community-centred group learning

15. Where next? – future challenges and opportunities Integrate options within local packages – don’t be preoccupied with differences between measures, incentivise farmers and non-farmers to work together, consider new and emerging groups and their needs Create a climate of active investigation with trust - promote regional and international exchange of experience, enable some risk-taking