Implications for food production, land use and rural development of the European Union's Single Farm Payment: indications from a survey of farmers' intentions in Germany, Portugal and the UK

R. B. Tranter*, A. Swinbank, M. J. Wooldridge, L. Costa, T. Knapp, G. P. J. Little, M. L. Sottomayor

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

65 Citations (Scopus)
17 Downloads

Abstract

The 2003 reform of the European Union's (EU) Common Agricultural Policy introduced a decoupled income support for farmers called the Single Farm Payment (SFP). Concerns were raised about possible future land use and production changes and their impact on rural communities. Here, such concerns are considered against the workings of the SFP in three EU Member States. Various quantitative studies that have determined the likely impact of the SFP within the EU and the study countries are reviewed. We present the results of a farm survey conducted in the study countries in which farmers' responses to a decoupling scenario similar to the SFP were sought. We found that little short-term change was proposed in the three, rather different, study countries with only 30% of the farmers stating that they would alter their mix of farm activities. Furthermore, less than 30% of all respondents in each country would idle any land under decoupling. Of those who would adopt a new activity, the most popular choices were forestry, woodland and non-food crops.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)656-671
Number of pages16
JournalFood Policy
Volume32
Issue number5-6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2007

Keywords

  • CAP reform
  • Farmers' intentions
  • Food production
  • Germany, Portugal and the UK
  • Land use and rural development

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Implications for food production, land use and rural development of the European Union's Single Farm Payment: indications from a survey of farmers' intentions in Germany, Portugal and the UK'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this