SIDEA Summer School
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”
Bari 8 – 10 September 2008
The European Commission and the CAP decision making process:
Influence of side-payments over the policy outcomes
PhD : Matteo Iagatti
Supervisor: Prof. Alessandro Sorrentino
Università della Tuscia, Viterbo
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
Outline
1. Subject of the Analysis and Objectives
2. Relevance of the theme
3. Theoretical Background
4. Key Starting Points
5. Bargaining Scenario for the analysis
6. “Work in Progress”
a. An institutional framework for the analysis
b. Detailed reconstruction of a decision making process
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
1. Subject of the Analysis and Objectives
Subject of the Analysis
The decision making process in which the
European Common policies are defined
In particular the CAP shaping process
Our aim is to highlight HOW and THROUGH WHICH INSTRUMENTS the
European Commission can manage and guide the process of CAP definition both
in terms of guidelines and instruments
General Objective
Understand IF and HOW the Commission
can “move”, using side-payments as a
leverage tool, Member State’s preferences in
order to reach an agreement in which
Commission’s preferences are encompassed.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
1. Subject of the Analysis and Objectives
General Objective is decomposed in TWO different steps:
A. Point out, inside the legislative procedure which are the STEPS and the
INSTITUTIONAL CHANNELS where the Commission works in order to
close the gap between MS’s position. In other words, to search for the
moments and the places inside the procedure where the EC takes stock of
MS’s preferences and can propose INTERMEDIATE COMPROMISES in
order to get a positive and favorable agreement.
B. Propose a specific CASE STUDY (Health Check, Sugar Reform) in which
the elements emerged during the previous research phase can serve to
REBUILD THE COMPLETE BARGAINING PROCESS in order to obtain as
much data as possible to understand MS’s and EC preferences and trace the
continuous modifications of the agreement. All these data serves as a basis
for the ANALYTICAL MODEL we are trying to develop.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
2. Relevance of the theme
The Analysis became relevant considering the RECENT REFORMS that has
changed CAP shape and instruments and the impending Treaty modification
that will bring CO-DECISION as legislative procedure under which CAP is
defined.
1. CAP after the Mid Term Review:
• Which perspectives for the CAP after the Fischler reform: is it still a
“COMMON” policy?
• Shifting the DISTRIBUTIONAL STRUGGLE between MSs from the common
arena to the national governments Æ wide margins of maneuver for MSs in the
Fischler reform implementation (crawling renationalization)
• DOMESTIC CHOICES in the reform implementation will make national
bargaining positions more RIGID for further CAP negotiations Æ relevance of
entanglements between domestic and common arena
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
2. Relevance of the theme
2. Changing Institutional and procedural settings :
The REFORMED TREATY ( also called Lisbon Treaty) will introduce new
elements on the CAP definition process. CO-DECISION will substitute
Consultation giving more powers to the EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, which
is today only a consultative body over agricultural issues.
This will affect the procedure not only from a formal point of view, but also
from an OPERATIVE perspective ( Comitology)
In this context, understand how the CAP shaping and definition process is
carried out by the various actors involved is important in order to
understand how the relation and the balance of powers between them can
affect future reform attempts
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
3. Theoretical Background
Contribution in literature are referable to TWO main approaches
INTERGOVERNMENTALISTS
Utilitarian approach
MS’s interests as the engine
of European integration
Council as leading institution
UE Treaties
NEO-FUNCTIONALISTS
Not only national interests
dominates the decision
making and integration
process
Active role of COMM
“Everyday Life” inside the
EU Institution, Committees.
Different approach proposed by Putnam
(1988)
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
3. Theoretical Background
•
Putnam (1988) conceived the entanglements between international
negotiation and domestic politics as a game of ratification of international
treaties
•
He called level I the international «bargaining between the negotiators,
leading to a tentative agreement», and the level II «separate discussions
within each group of constituents about whether to ratify the agreement» at
domestic level
•
Putnam defined «the win set for a given level II constituency as the set of all
possible level I agreements that would win when simply voted up or down»
•
«Larger win sets make level I agreement more likely, ceteris paribus […] The
relative size of the respective level II win sets will affect the distribution of
the joint gains from the international bargain»
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
4. Key Starting Points
•
CAP reform is the outcome of an international negotiation between
national governments (intergovernmental approach)
•
Each country adapt its bargaining position mediating between the
national interests and the prevailing drifts in the Common arena (Putnam
1988, Putnam et al., 1993, Patterson, 1997)
•
The “capacity/possibility” of each Member State (MS) to “pilot” domestic
politics (in order to ease national pressures) and manage the negotiations
at EU level, will determine its bargaining position
•
A primary role is played by the EU institutional architecture and the
decision making procedures (neo-functionalist approach)
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Bargaining Scenario for the Analysis
The tools for the analysis emerged Inside the theoretical
background could be represented as follows
I Level feasible
agreement
DE
FR
UK
ES
IT
EC
Status Quo
Radical reform
In this context we aim in understanding HOW the COMM can
“MOVE” national win sets inside the agreement area or Which
instruments the COMM uses to “REFUND” those MSs which are
not “satisfied” by the level I agreement.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
The first step is aimed in highlighting the “STRUCTURE” inside which the
various actors performs their role inside the decision making process
The analysis will be based on a detailed reconstruction of the decision
making process of a recently amended Common Market Organization
(CMO): The Sugar Reform (why sugar??)
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
Why Sugar??
THREE main consideration:
1. Importance that the sugar sector has assumed for the COMM in relation
to the completion of the reform process started in 2003.
2. The distance between the position of the MSs on crucial issues such as
quota reduction/distribution or the temporary restructuring scheme.
3. Heterogeneous nature of the issues involved both political and technical.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
The first step is aimed in highlighting the “STRUCTURE” inside which the
various actors performs their role inside the decision making process
The analysis is based on a detailed reconstruction of the decision
making process of a recently amended Common Market Organization
(CMO): The Sugar Reform (why sugar??)
We are looking at each phase of the procedure, emphasizing the
main constraint towards the settlement of an agreement.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
The work developed so far has focused on the steps of the
procedure in which the COMM can propose intermediate and the
evolution of four fundamental issues of the reform:
•Prices
•Quota Management
•Restructuring Scheme
•Direct Payments
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
We considered different kinds of documents provided from the COMM
and the Council on their Institutional web sites
The evolution of each issue has been traced ed along the different steps
of the procedure throughout a documental reconstruction
The differences in MSs and COMM position are also taken into
consideration in each step of the procedure and for each issue considered
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
We considered different kinds of documents provided from the COMM
and the Council on their Institutional web sites
The evolution of each issue has been traced ed along the different steps
of the procedure throughout a documental reconstruction
The differences in MSs and COMM position are also taken into
consideration in each step of the procedure and for each issue considered
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
Overall
Prices
(Articles 3-4-5)
Quota management
(Art 10-11)
Restructuring
Direct payments
DE
Budget neutrality is
Could consider gradual
Wants no MS veto right, bioquestionable, compensation
Wants a rapid
price cuts (max. 3
ethanol options (partial
Wants compulsory quota
could be lower. Rejects partial
implementation, is concerned steps) but is aware of
dismantling) and no link
cuts to be Council
coupling (even temporary) and
about deadlines and a review the difficulties of direct
between the factory and
competence
seeks technical changes for
should not be excluded
payment
diversification measures.
energy crops.
implementation.
FR
Supports the proposal: price
Wants full efficiency of the
Wanted the possibility of
Compensation should be higher
reduction, decoupling, extra Wants to keep to 39%
scheme to operate as from
production increases
if budget allows. Favours
sugar quota. High
price cut and would see
year 1, is against
after 2010 and asked
coupling of aids for DOM, at
importance given to
price staggering
conversion of factories to
quota transfer from DOM
100% compensation rate, if
treatment of the DOM sugar
negatively
refineries but to the bioto mainland
necessary with State Aids
sector
ethanol option.
IT
Wants strong MS role,
Opposed to price cuts and
partial dismantling to
production reductions but Favour a lower price cut Wants compulsory quota
include converts to refining,
have engaged on
which would enable a
cuts to be Council
additional amount for
restructuring fund,
higher compensation
competence as a linear
diversification measures
diversification measures and
rate.
reduction of the quota.
and a top-up coupled
refining quota.
payment.
Wants compensation rate of
100% and national aid should
be allowed in southern
countries.
ES
Against the reform The most
Want smaller and
Wants compulsory quota
affected regions are those
staggered price cuts
cuts to be Council
already hit by the 2nd
calculated using derived
competence
package reforms.
prices.
Disagree with 100% of the
aid for the industry, want
MS involvement and are
interested in bio-ethanol
(partial dismantling option).
Wanted 100% compensation
and a partial coupling option.
2006 is too early to start.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
1
An Institutional framework for the analysis
As shown above we covered the first three step of the procedure, now
we’re approaching the most complex part of the work:
1. Keep trace of the modification during the drafting and
implementation phases
2. Interpretation of the collected data
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
2
Detailed reconstruction of a decision making process
With the information obtained from the first step we want to build
up an analytical model of the decision making process which is
capable to catch the COMM role and the instrument it uses.
Various options :
1. Build up detailed preferences for the COMM and the MSs over the
issues in discussion
2. Trace all the changes and quantify the side-payments
3. Implement these information in the existing model we build up so
far.
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
5. Work in Progress
2
Detailed reconstruction of a decision making process
The analytical possibilities we have are different
Various options :
1. We can try to asses the bargaining power of each actor in the light of
new data we collected
2. We can try to model the overall process or part of it ( e.g.
Compromise inside the council)
3. We can simply describe the overall process from a more political
point of view ( most difficult!!!)
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008
Thank You for your attention
Critics Advices and Comments
are more than welcome!!!!!!!!!!
Contact: [email protected]
“Metodologia della ricerca nelle scienze sociali e in economia agraria”, Bari. , 10 - 13 September, 2008