The James Hutton Institute
This page is no longer updated. The Macaulay Land Use Research Institute joined forces with SCRI on 1 April 2011 to create The James Hutton Institute.
The James Hutton InstituteThis page is no longer updated. The Macaulay Land Use Research Institute joined forces with SCRI on 1 April 2011 to create The James Hutton Institute.
I-INTRODUCTION
Why should we raise the question of an agricultural policy adapted to
Mediterranean areas? Because the current CAP has severe negative effects
on the economy, the environment and the life of rural Mediterranean societies.
Is it a problem of conception or application? The objectives and the
internal logic of current policy will be discussed, as well as its possible
effects on various regional situations. Beyond this, using examples to
demonstrate situations where policy is not satisfactory, the logic and
principles of another more suitable policy are outlined. Finally, in order
to show better its effects and the conditions for success, the applications
of this new policy are tested experimentally.
These reflections on the subject will be presented in this paper.
II- LOGIC OF THE EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL POLICY
First of all, please excuse the oversimplified aspect of this presentation
: its objective is not to describe what technicians and experts know already,
but only to retain some obvious facts relating to the significant consequences.
Even if some methods of implementation soften the general logic of the
policy, we must consider that the essential preoccupation of the CAP is
to regulate the quantity of agricultural products on the market, in order
to stabilise prices and so to maintain the income of efficient farmers,
as well as trying to reach the world market rate, dictated by the laws
of supply and demand. This market law is the essential constraint on production,
and the constitution of an income for the farmer implies that production
should be as important as possible, and at the most satisfactory prices.
For any specific good, there are a range of areas which will be suitable
for its production, but in addition there is a need for appropriate estate
structures (concentration and expansion of properties), a race for labour
productivity as well as for capital.
This was a relatively positive view of the evolution of policy. However,
there is another side :
1 -In the most fertile areas, the race for productivity leads to excess which jeopardises the environment and public health (e.g. : excessive fertilisation, pesticide use etc.).
2 -In the other areas :
- elimination of a great number of farmers who change their activities and migrate towards other areas (principally urban) or become unemployed.
- marginalisation of farmers who try to produce in non-competitive conditions (few and scattered lands, poor ecological potentialities, limited capital etc.)
- loss of agricultural land (afforestation, fire etc.)
It is not the CAP which induces this logic of production and which decides
the world market. The CAP is only allowing it to operate while its essential
aim is to stabilise prices...which is ambitious goal.
Moreover, the CAP tries to soften the extreme effects on the agricultural
population who cannot follow the productivity dynamic and the market. Therefore,
the CAP "accompanies" them in their marginalisation and their
disappearance, by softening the worst situation with some financial help.
And when more serious consequences for the environment are discovered,
some "agri-environmental" measures are taken.
Could it be different with a CAP whose aim is agricultural production,
and which obeys principally the laws of the marketplace and the logic of
production? It is logical that agricultural policy should be fundamentally
based on the most productive and competitive production systems, and so,
it is natural that the most efficient areas should be the reference.
III- SOME CONSEQUENCES WHICH POSE PROBLEMS
Presented in that way, it is normal that the range of measures proposed
by the CAP is not satisfactory for the less-favoured areas. This is not
the place to describe all the regional situations which are considered
to be disadvantaged and where the decisions taken to regulate production
have aggravated the situation. Only one of the cases will be developed
here and alternative policies will be put forward.
But, before that, let us emphasise the diversity of the disadvantaged
regional situations which arises from different ecological environments
(e.g. areas of dry and wet mountains) and from different historical pasts.
These could have led, for example, to the development in certain places
of cattle herds and in others of some sheep flocks, with a strong link
to local traditions.
Historical situations have also resulted in a range of levels of population
density, and some very different systems of land management. For example,
how can one compare the situation in Andalucia, with its large estates
and low population densities (Silva Perez, 1996), with the case of the
Corsican Castagniccia, where high population until recently led to lands
being extremely divided into small parcels with individual ownership?
In such conditions, how could we be satisfied by the application of
the same rules for areas so different? The application of such general
rules is dangerous. I have underlined this problem before with the example
of the EC measures concerning the discouragement of the production of mixed
wines: the application of "grubbing-up" premiums in Corsica led
for more than 10 years to the destruction of all traditional vineyards,
without causing the disappearance of the big vineyards making mixed wines
(cf. de Casabianca, 1995).
In the case of farm livestock, the introduction of premium to oblige dairy farmers to change to beef farming, and then to "extensify" the livestock system, has had a series of unpredicted effects :
- massive conversion of sheep dairy farmers into beef farmers
- desertion of pastures, which have been quickly invaded by shrubs
- appearance of so-called beef farmers. In fact, they are simply cattle owners and they do not manage their grazing system.
- multiplication of fires, to a certain extent due to these "false"
farmers, who do not manage properly their grazing system but use it to
allow the survival of their cattle, while deriving a source of income via
the premia.
For this reason, an objective such as "extensification" of
livestock systems, which is absolutely justified in high productivity areas,
becomes catastrophic in areas already disadvantaged by the economy and
by a context of handicaps, where the agriculture is the ultimate activity
for management of the land.
In such a context, we could analyse and diagnose a situation which could
be summarised in such a way, for the dry Mediterranean area :
IV- RUDIMENTS OF ANALYSIS AND DIAGNOSIS IN THE DRY MEDITERRANEAN
AREA:
The rural areas in the non-irrigated Mediterranean have the following
identical characteristics :
1 - Ecologically speaking, they have :
- a long and severe dry season
- a strong irregularity in the climate, especially in respect to monthly rainfall.
- a relatively high mean temperature, which limits the break in winter
vegetation and which causes a strong development of spring vegetation.
This amount of vegetation is a fire-hazard in summer, when it dries.
2 - Socially and demographically, the great majority are characterised
by a high rate of exodus; especially those in countries which have entered
early into the dynamic of industrialisation and integration of the European
market, if not the world market.
3 - Economically, most of these areas are far away from the centres
of industrial revolutions. They did not benefit from the effects of development
due to such proximity and their social destruction is even deeper when
the process of recession started a long time ago (sometimes, more than
one century ago).
For the rural areas in a country which recently joined the EC, the sudden
competition of the market for agricultural products has induced a violent
change and a brutal social destabilisation.
In both situations, industry and the service sectors could only offer
alternative jobs for which the price was the abandonment of the land. Tourism
could have acted as a substitute employer, when the possibilities were
there, but it was a very seasonal activity and limited to a brief period.
4- Structurally, the speed at which the rural population disappeared
prevented reorganisation of the farm structure, allowing then a modernisation
of the farming systems. Sometimes, the historical context has added to
the complexity of such situations.
To summarise these characteristics, it is clear that much needs to be
done in these disadvantaged areas, which have been deserted by agriculture,
and then became very sensitive to fire hazard, where the lack of any substitute
activity has created a unemployment rate of 40%. Moreover, many people
obliged to leave their agricultural activity did not have any social protection,
nor any pension provided, having lost their jobs, which was a weak source
of income and security.
We face directly what Bertrand Hervieu calls the '"social and spatial
marginalisation" and what Germaine Tillon called the "turning
the rural society into tramps".
Society is not totally unaware and passive about this situation. If
it cannot clearly analyse the causes and if its judgements are very often
too hasty and mistaken, the idea of being the victims of a system elaborated
by some managers of the European market or world market, who marginalise
people who cannot or do not know how to be more efficient, is very strong.
Therefore, it is not surprising that these marginalised societies induce
some survival , resistance, even parasitism mechanisms in which the agricultural
activity remains a "REFUGE" sector, with an undefined function.
In such conditions, how may agricultural areas where efficient agriculture
has been able to be implemented, where the role of the agriculture is defined
and important, be included in the same system of rules as areas where the
population is in exodus, where the environment is full of handicaps and
even not really managed, and where the agricultural production is totally
non-significant
1 - In the first case, agriculture is an important activity, which has a role in the orientation of the CAP.
2 - In the second case, it is clear that the agriculture cannot be considered only from an economic perspective:
-its role of environment management is very significant
-its social function of "refuge" should be taken into account and analysed
-its three functions should be integrated, taking into account specific situations (ecological, social, geographical etc.)
3 - Moreover, in terms of ethical justice, it is unfair that decisions
are taken only to serve the interests of an advantaged group, without consideration
of the consequences for the less advantaged.
V- AN ALTERNATIVE LOGIC FOR EUROPEAN POLICY
From all the considerations seen above, how may another more satisfactory
approach, more adapted to the situation of these regions, be achieved?
-To take diversity into account:
There is of course a variability between the situations. In some, depopulation may be more or less important, with perhaps the possibility of another economic activity, like rural tourism, which may be integrated
.
This is, for example, what was done in Alpine areas, where skiing, as
well as summer tourism, offered an interesting new potential.
There is therefore a need to identify some typical types of situations,
to be able then to see their variability, without of course multiplying
the typologies. These types of situations must be able to be used as reference
points for the building of another logic and for the testing of such a
new logic.
-The environmental function
First of all, it should not be forgotten that the motivation for regulating
the market for agricultural productions cannot be part of a agri-environmental
policy, even if this preoccupation must be kept in mind.
However, it may be admitted that agricultural activity in principle
is an efficient way of managing the environment, and such a service
should be rewarded at its just value.
It is clear that this service does not have the same value everywhere,
and even within the same region, there is a hierarchy of actions and situations,
according to the strategic interest of this spatial management.
For example, in a region like the Cap Corse, where the agricultural
exodus resulted in an invasion of shrubs and trees (maquis), and where
strong winds enhance the risk of fires, it is essential that the priority
should be given to the management of fields, which could act as a firebreak.
However, a farmer undertaking this kind of management, could use as well some fields which are not so efficient in term of fire protection, but which are logical to use in term of herd management. These fields could be then have a second rank importance, because they allow the activity of this farmer as well.
Other types of fields could be defined in this strategy. But before
going further, it should be underlined that the environmental function
of the agriculture requires zoning, which should be done by experts, by
local politicians, farmers and ecological groups.
- The economical function
The law of the market being the cause of the catastrophic situation
of disadvantaged areas, it seems logical not to take it as a basis of an
agricultural policy for the disadvantaged areas. It does not mean of course
that the economy should be ignored. This is evident because:
- on one hand, the environmental function cannot be the only justification and financier of the agricultural activity in an area,
- on the other hand, because, handicapped the same by an ecological
context as by unfavourable structures, agriculture remains a relatively
important activity, and is essential to valorise other activities, e.g.
: rural tourism, which plays an essential role in the mobilisation of regional
gastronomic resources, as well as the management of the landscape.
Therefore, it is important to orientate agricultural policy in a direction
which will allow it to restructure radically the units of production still
present on the land and apt to return to a "contractual" approach.
It is justified for farmers to be supported by the community, so that
they provide an active land management , such as :
- involvement in a zoning to protect against fire
- growing of products that enhance the gastronomic local heritage.
The credibility and efficiency of such a policy will depend upon its
economic, ecological and social coherency, and upon its operational characteristics.
If the ecological coherency implies the insertion of fire prevention
measures, the economic coherency will make sure that the farmer has a decent
and regular income.
-The social function
It is obvious that the last point mentioned above also is a part of
the main social function of agriculture, in the considered areas.
However, social cohesion must be appreciated at a local level as well.
It would be counter-productive if several systems to reward agricultural
activity exist at a local level which are not compatible.
Let us develop this idea:
Currently, the premium for beef herds are considered as a pseudo-social
management of the consequences of The Market and of the CAP, in these areas.
These premium systems allow a large number of the farmers, who gave-up
a non-productive activity, to keep their farmer status through cattle owning.
Moreover, it guarantees them an income. However, this breeding system,
principally of cattle, in which the animal doesn't have any productive
aim, implies that the animals survive almost by themselves, in a "maquis"
which tends to enclose itself. So, logically, the old tradition of burning
comes back. The problem is that in the current agricultural context, these
fires are not sufficiently controlled and may be devastating.
We may equally note that in addition to these people who were farmers
before, some "new farmers", principally marginal people from
urban areas, have bought cattle and become "passive farmers".
So, the agricultural policy here is obliged to deal as well with a social
problem, for which it doesn't really have any responsibilities.
So, it can be seen that in the name of social cohesion for the CAP that
could be implemented, such facts should be tackled.
Once again, it can be seen how a satisfactory CAP should include the
economical, ecological and social factors.
-Operational approach
In the administration of zoning, it is necessary to include all the
various local groups concerned, as well as those responsible at a higher
level (department/region) for fund management. However, the local analysis
shows that in the implementation of such a policy, some difficulties will
arise. A local commission to monitor the implementation is necessary, as
well as an operational structure given some powers of intervention and
management.
Indeed, in the proximity of villages, it is usual to find a close and
confused patchwork of land ownership, which often led to the desertion
of such places, invaded then by maquis. So, in order to fight against fire,
the community should implement a system of common management through an
operational body (similar to SICA), with the power to buy out or take management
actions, such as maquis removal, ahead of the owners of the lands.
It is obvious that such a role should be given to an organisation at
the local level. An "agri-environmental" policy suggests here
the well-known principle of 'subsidiarity'.
Management of local differences
Even if Cap Corse is not the Castagniccia or the Balagne, and even less Sardinia or Andalucia, it is obvious that an agricultural policy in the disadvantaged areas of Mediterranean must be very adaptable.
The implementation of standards, regional or national, should be therefore
banned, to maintain this adaptability.
Of course, some particular situations, such as the great risk of fire,
could justify local financial intervention. However, the financial burden
should be shared equally between the EC and the region concerned.
Of course, this does not mean that the excessively disadvantaged agriculture
will be restored. Each small region would need to proceed to a zoning,
with some priorities for the environmental contribution, and in each region,
an incentive policy for regional products should be implemented.
CONCLUSIONS
This work was based essentially on the analysis of the rural areas with
serious handicaps, especially in the Mediterranean areas (mainly Corsica).
Contrary to the highly productive areas, the approach of real examples
confirmed the hypothesis that agricultural policy and land resource management
can not be realised with satisfaction by only using an economical approach,
only justified by the laws of the marketplace.
The development of disadvantaged regions of the Mediterranean, which
themselves reflect the downside of the play of market forces, demands an
approach which integrates environmental and social aspects with an economic
"revue" approach within the context of development.
Some distinct themes can be identified which are important for an agricultural
and rural policy which addresses these concerns. In such a policy, which
may be adjusted as a result of trials in a number of situations, each region
should be left an important margin to take better account of regional and
local diversity, without, however, leaving disadvantaged regions all the
financial weight of such adjustments. The principle of subsidiarity should
operate down to the local level.
REFERENCES
de Casabianca, F. (1989). Les grands malentendus de l'extensification: du contrôle de l'exédents agricoles à la dérive des espaces méditerranéens. INRA/CEMAGREF.
Silva Perez, R. (1996). In "Las politicas ganaderas de la Union
Europea. Aplicación y aplicabilidad en Andalucia" (ed U de
Huelva).