2013 : French position on CAP project ALVES Paulo Mateus FURTADO Caio César LABAQUE German LE BELLEGUY Maxime RAMBAUD Mathis THIBAULT Benoït ERASMUS IP Gödöllo Summer School
Jan 04, 2016
2013 : French position on CAP
projectALVES Paulo Mateus FURTADO Caio CésarLABAQUE German LE BELLEGUY MaximeRAMBAUD MathisTHIBAULT Benoït
ERASMUS IP Gödöllo
Summer School
Introduction
I. The CAP in France • Aid distribution • Production cost: France vs Mercosur
II. Analysis of CAP impacts • Socioeconomic • Environmental • What we expect about CAP?• Why to reform the CAP?
III. Possibles scenarios post 2013A. Keeping the same level of CAP subsidiesB. Decreasing the level of CAP subsidies
IV. Conclusion
Introduction
General aspects:
Total area: 55 millions ha
Use land area: 32 millions ha
62 % for crops production 34 % for grassland 2 % of vineyard
Agro-food economy
3,5 % of the national GDP
66,8 billion of €
3,4 % of the employment
Half of the value come from cereals and wine production
Farms structures
348 000 farms
Average of 73,3 hectares/ farm
3 people for 100 ha
Different productions
• Crops • Vegetables• Wine • Livestock
•Dairy production•Beef •Pork •Poultry
I. The CAP in France
A. Aid distributionI Pillar (1000€) II Pillar (1000€)
France 8946,9 959,4
Germany 5704 1186,9
Hungary 513,6 537,5
Source: DG Agri
EU Budget & Used land
French CAP Subsidies
Source: Agreste
B. Production cost France vs Mercorsur
France MERCOSUR
WHEAT 1080€/Ha 330€/Ha
CORN 1207€/Ha 512€/Ha
PORK 1,53€/Kg 1,11€/Kg
POULTRY 1,44€/Kg 0,90€/Kg
MILK 0,29€/L 0,20€/LSource: Office-Elevage / EMBRAPA /
INTA
II. Analysis of CAP impacts
In which field can the CAP impact on?
A. Socioeconomic• 15,5 millions (25%) of French live in the countryside
• 770 000 employs (3,4% of active population)
• French culture (countryside without farmers is not countryside)
• Agriculture: 3,5% of GDP 66,8 billions Euros
• Cereals:
• 70,2 million tons
• Cattle:
• bovins: 19,9 millions
• Pork : 14,8 millions
• Poultry: 182,9 millions
• Tourism : Cheese, wine production, cattle, local products
Strengths Weaknesses
1st agriculture power in Europe Expensive labor forceStrong agro indstry companies Strict environmental legislationGood agriculture knowledges Expensive landGood mecanisation of farm Small average size of exploitationsGood management skills Low R&D investmentsDevelopped Agrotourism Increasing of unemployment rateDevelopment of local products with strong added value Rural exodStrong agriculture culture in the countryside Difficulties to innovateRural developementOpportunities Threats
Increasing of world food demand Increasing of agrofood product pricesIncreasing of EU food demand Increasing competitivness of Eastern European
countriesIncreasing of EU purchasing power Food security
SOCIAL / ECONOMICS
Environment
•Cereals: 94460 km2 (51% of arable land)
•Cattle in mountains
•Rural development:
• improving the competitiveness of agriculture and forestry;
• improving the environment and countryside;
• improving the quality of life in rural areas and encouraging diversification of the rural economy.
Strengths Weaknesses
Good environmental legislation Intensive agriculture and environment together?
Landscape management
Opportunities Threats
Environment supported by the EU Increasing of CO2 emmission
Aids moving from the I pillar to II pillar Degradation of biodiversity
Payment in Ecological services (carbon)
Environmental
•Food security (quantity)
•Food safety (quality)
•Preservation of biodiversity
•Landscape maintenance
•Food price stabilisation
•Profitable agriculture for farmers
C. What we expect about CAP?
•Take in account the environmental work of farmers
•Reduce market food fluctuation prices
•Favorise label and regional products
•Favorise the competitiveness of farmers
•Good relation between retailers/farmers
•Invest more in R&D
D. Why to reform the CAP?
III. Possibles scenarios post
2013
A. Keeping the same level of CAP subsidies B. Decreasing the level of CAP subsidies
•To decrease the first pillar: 88 to 48%
•To increase the 2nd pillar: 12% to 26%
•To create a third pillar: 26%• To remunerate maintenance of public goods from farmers
• To dynamise innovation
A. Keeping the same level of CAP subsidies
B. Decreasing the level of CAP subsidies
30%30%
104 400 farms104 400 farms
9,6 millions ha9,6 millions ha
4,65 millions of rural exod4,65 millions of rural exod
231 000 farmers go to unemployment231 000 farmers go to unemployment
20,04 billions € GDP20,04 billions € GDP
Catastrophic scenario 2013 - 2020
•Regarding the 2nd scenario we conclude that the socioeconomics and environmental problems generated by a possible reduction of CAP is too huge for France
•A consensus has to be taken in order to keep food safety and food security in Europe against the emergence of third countries like Brazil & Argentina
Conclusion
Thank you for your attention !!!
Did’u see what they Did’u see what they
want to do with our want to do with our
agriculture?!agriculture?!
Don’t worry man!!! Don’t worry man!!!
Good things will Good things will
never disappear!!! never disappear!!!