9Th June 2006, Parma, Italy
Report No 2
14 June 2006
CARERA
2nd Meeting
9th June 2006, Parma, Italy
Minutes Report
Participants: Prof. Konstadinos Mattas (AUTH, Greece), Prof. Csabas Forgàcs (CUB, Hungary), Prof. Fillipo Arfini (UOP, Italy), Prof. Alfons Oude Lansink (WU, Netherlands), Prof. Peter Midmore (UWA, UK), Dr. Stratos Loizou (AUTH, Greece), Mr. Michele Donati (UOP, Italy), Ms. Katerina Kavallari (JLU, Germany), Ms. Meropi Tsakiri (AUTH, Greece), Ms. Vasiliki Fourmouzi (UOC, Greece), Mr. Steve Lowman (UWA, UK), Mr. Roberto Gigante (UOP, Italy), Ms Elena Panciroli (UOP, Italy).
Saturday, 9th June 2006
Session 1: Introduction
1. Welcome of participants, Prof. P. Arfini and Prof. K. Mattas.
2. Presentation of participants - all participants.
3. Short presentation of the project’s progress, Ms. Meropi Tsakiri.
Key Issues: Description of work packages, Deliverables and Timetables, Coordinator’s and partners’ responsibilities by WP, Next meetings.
Session 2: Short Description of WP5 and WP6
1. Presentation of WP5, Methodological background, Dr. Stratos Loizou.
Key issues: Literature review of I-O in regional applications, Regionalization Methodology, Classification Scheme, Technology assumptions.
2. Discussion concerning the WP5 presentation:
Prof. Midmore informed that for Wales,already exists a regionalI-O table, so they will construct a sub-regional I-O table. Prof. Arfini and Ms. Kavallari committed to check the existence of national and regional I-O tables intheir countries.
Partners can pass to Dr. Loizou (AUTH) information regarding their national I-O tables.The AUTH team will upload to the website a detailed paper on GRIT methodology. Additionally, by the end of June, a Data Requirements List for the construction of the I-O tables will be circulated to the partners and uploaded to website.Partners also, by end of August should send their Regional I-O tablesfor the case study areas, derived mechanically, to AUTH to check. Then, partners will proceed utilizing survey techniques and according to their region characteristics.
3. Presentation of WP6, Ms Vasiliki Fourmouzi.
Key issues: Assessment of the CAP reform effects, Types of variables, EU policies, Farmland characteristics, Descriptive analysis.
4. Discussion concerning the WP6 presentation:
Prof. Oude Lansink made an inquiry about the link of this WP with the other WPs and Prof. Midmore suggested that the comparison with the rest model predictions and the farmers’ perceptions might be very interesting.
Session 3: Review of WP1 and WP3 progress
1. Presentation of WP1, Prof. P. Midmore.
Key issues: Draft Literature Review reports, Key dates for forward planning, Initial discussion paper of case study area selection, Case study research.
2. Discussion concerning the WP1 presentation:
The Hungarian team should complete Literature review (Task 1.1) by the end of June. Allconcerned partners should send the revisions of their Literature review by that time. The UK team will circulate a checklist of the data needed for the case study desk research to be used as a guideline by the partners and their draft desk research report. The final draft of WP1 (Deliverables 1 & 2) should be prepared by end of September. Draft of interview questionnaire will be send to the partners after the Aberystwyth meeting.
3. Presentation of WP3, Prof. F. Arfini
Key issues: Description of WP3, Information for regional Positive Mathematical Programming models, Timetable, Organisation of the database, description of the variables to be used, the FADN and REGIO databases characteristics.
4. Discussion concerning WP3
Prof. Arfini raised the question of using individual or aggregated data. Prof. Midmore suggested that this programming should be fed to the I-O model and the efficiency models.
All partners agreed to use the 2003 FADN data. Prof. Arfini and Prof. Forgàcs will go to Brusselsto acquire the needed data in June. An extension of three months will be asked from the European Commission only for first deliverables (due to Month 6th), because of delays in money transferringand data acquisition.
Session 4: Review of WP4 progress and Case studies
1. Presentation of WP4, Prof. Oude Lansink.
Key Issues: Description of Progress, Literature study, Technical and allocative efficiency, Technical Change, Data requirements, Open issues, Work plan.
2. Discussion concerning WP4.
Prof. Midmore made an inquiry on the availability of the data needed, and Prof. Arfini argued that not all are included in the FADN data.
Prof. Oude Lansink will inform Prof. Arfini and Prof. Forgàcs about his WP4 data needs.
3. Case Studies Issues, Ms Katerina Kavallari.
Key Issues: Description of Progress, Data requirements, Literature review, Synthesis report, German team’s Contribution, Further issues, Work plan.
4. Discussion concerning Case Studies Issues.
Prof. Midmore stated that the case study research involves a small number of cases and a large number of variables to be used.
Partners should decide about dedicating a half-day’s workshop in the next meeting considering the content of their case study researches and reports.
Session 5: Review of WP2 progress
1. Presentation of WP2, Prof. C. Forgàcs
Key Issues: Critical evaluation and elaboration of FADN (D3), Implementing farming activity model, Links with WP3 and WP4,Formulating data needs for WP2, Work plan.
2. Discussion concerning WP2
Partnersresponsible for the WPs should specifytheirneeds for data. On the forthcoming trip to Brussels, with Prof. Arfini, Prof. C. Forgàcs will obtain the FADN data. Also all WPs leaders should upload to website a workpaper explaining the theoretical background of their WPs.
Session 6: Conclusions and Organisational Issues
1. Administrative and financial issues, Ms Meropi Tsakiri
Key Issues: Current affairs, Project’s Website, First Progress Report, Project’s work package specific evaluation of progress, financial payments.
End of second meeting by Prof. Arfini and Prof. Mattas, who thanked the UOP team for their excellent meeting organisation and their hospitality