CARERA
CARERA
The impact of CAP reform on the Employment Levels in Rural Areas
Project Meeting
Location: University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Date:Friday 27th October 2006
Participants:Prof. Konstadinos Mattas (AUTH);Prof. Peter Midmore (UWA); Prof. Yves Surry (SLU); Prof. Csaba Forgacs (CUB);Ass. Prof. Vangelis Tzouvelekas (UOC); Dr. Michele Donati (UOP); Sandor Elek (CUB); (SLU); Nerys Fuller-Love (UWA); Prof. Luigi Grossi (UOP); Katerina Kavallari (JLU); Lesley Langstaff (UWA); Gunnar Linberg (SLU); Dr. Stratos Loizou (AUTH); Stephen Lowman (UWA); Dr. Mark Rhodes (UWA); Dennis Thomas (UWA); Meropi Tsakiri (AUTH);; Ass. Prof. Arnovan der Vlist(WU); Xueqin Zhu(WU).
Apologies:Prof. Filippo Arfini (UOP); Prof. Michael Schmitz (JLU).
1.Progress report / overview
The coordinator, Prof. Mattas, underlined the following points:
- Now in the 8th month of the work with a need to intensify the pace of work. Also expressed was the need to focus on the principal research question, namely the impact of CAP reform on employment.
- The dates and locations of the next meetings were detailed (changes are introduced later).
- A note was made that although extensions have been provided for some of the deliverables it is unlikely that the commission will be comfortable with any further delay.
A refresher of the project aims was presented together with a review of the deliverables, timescales and responsibilities by Mrs Meropi Tsakiri.
Reports on individual work packages
Please see CARERA web site for lodged papers and presentations
2.Work Package 1
(State of the Art in Theory and Practice of Rural Development Measures)
Literature review
The lead partner UWA and Ms Lesley Langstaffpresented the findings from the literature review. Progress from other contributors was reported and the form and content of further contributions were discussed.
Desk research and Semi structured interviews
UWA and Mr Steve Lowman presented also, the results from the desk research and also discussed the workflow leading to the deliverable 14.
Some discussion followed the methodological approach to be adopted in the analysis of the semi-structured interviews.
It was suggested that the interview tapes be professionally transcribed
One partner suggested that the process might be eased if focus groups rather than one on one interviews were conducted. Some discussion of the merits of this occurred.
Software exists to assist in the analysis of transcripts, one participant reporting on previous experience that software can assist in developing themes but may be expensive to acquire and may result in some ‘tram lining’ ofthe analysis.
Partners agreed to provide support to those who have less experience in the analysis and interpretation of qualitative data.
Prof. Surry suggested that a close collaboration could be achieved through regular Internetchat.The partners welcomed Prof. Surry’s suggestion and they kindly invited him to organise such sessions.
Deliverables D1 and D2 are expected to be on time.
Some discussion of the purpose of the work package took place with particular reference to the difficulty of disentangling of Pillars 1 and 2.
Prof. Mattas suggested the UWA team to cast the impact of Pillar 2 of EU on rural employment, since that is the main goal of this project,which will also distinguish it from others (like SERA). UWA team promised to make an attempt though the complete distinction of the effects can not be technically accomplished.
Prof. Surry suggested also that in order to have some general judgement on the rural employment impact partners should review 4-5 relevant papers using different methodologies and have a table of their results, conclusions and main messages.
Agreement to include quantitative measures of the reform’simpact found in the literature, together with an indication of the methodological approaches adopted and any gaps in the literature.
Also a decision to include a SWOT analysis for East Wales to provide a pro forma to assist other partners in drafting background material for the interviews.
Prof. Mattas highlighted also the fact that EU values especially high D14, which includes the rural development programmes impact, and Prof. Midmore suggested to be a relation with the WP6 and the stakeholders.
Suggestion also that the interview protocols include a question about the interviewee’s views on the new reforms that are in train.
3.Work package 2
(Databases)
Progress on data collection, with emphasis on data obtained from the FADN database, was presented by Prof. Csaba Forgacs. Partners were asked to indicate their data needs from Brussels if they have not already done so, or if additional needs have been identified.
A survey of economic transactions was discussed.
There are some issues regarding the conformity of survey and FADN data.
Also discussed was the need for a survey on rural needs and perceptions.
4.Work package 3
(Assessing the Structural Impact of CAP Reform in the Farming Sector)
Results were presented by Dr. Michele Donati on the effects of reform on European NUTS2 regions using 2002 data.
The Commission have sent all of the data required for Input / Output models to be calculated (using 2002 data).
A question arose as to the type of architecture (Regional or Sector level) to be adopted.
Awaiting further data from the EC (2003) and a decision on architecture.
Survey of perceptions and intentions
A final draft of the survey is to be completed by the end of November 2006.
Partners were asked to offer comments to the relevant team.
Deadline for the completion of the survey is Feb 07
Discussion
On rural transactions
Some of the information on farm transactions might be derived from the FADN data. However, for information on non-farm transactions and for farm transactions outside the regions, survey information would be required.
Sample selection
After some discussion, it was concluded that methodological issues determine sample selection for the rural transactions survey and that the sample selection may differ across regions as a result.Non-survey information may be used to identify the most important flows and it is then these identified sectors, which should be the subject of surveys for the most effective calibration of the relevant IO tables. No need to disaggregate the farming sector as changes to inputs into farming may be fed back into the IO tables. There is however a need to obtain the source of inputs and destination of outputs for the IO tables.
Prof. Mattas also proposed that not all partners should have common rules on how to construct the I-O tables in order to have flexibility, but they need to have common rules and principles on the construction of the questionnaire.
In addition, the partners made a particular request that the deliverables of this WP must be completed within the first year, as they constitute feedback for the rest of the WP’s.
5.Work package 6
(CAP Reform, Rural Development Measures and the Rural Stakeholder’s Perceptions and Intentions)
Ass. Prof. Vaggelis Tzouvelekas presented the suggested methodology to be used for the analysis of WP6.
Part 1 of the presented material relates only to the UK. The UKpartner is to provide data from an available secondary source for this component in order to implement one WP other than their own.
A survey of perceptions and intentions is to be conducted for Greece, Netherlands and Hungary.
Netherlands and Hungary should send their feedback on the questionnaire to Ass. Prof. Tzouvelekas.
6.Work package 5
(Assessment of the Overall Effects on Rural Employment and Income)
Material was presented for WP5 by Dr Stratos Loizou with a discussion following. Conclusion was that a survey is not required, rather that the required coefficients may be derived mechanically. Relevant partners are asked to derive the coefficients mechanically by the time of the next meeting. Prof. Mattas suggested also that a literature review should be conducted on superior data and imports.
7.Work package 4
(Assessment of the CAP Reform on Farmer’s Economic Performance)
The lead partner WU and Dr. Xueqin Zhu presented the proposed methodology of the WP4. Suggestions were made by other participants regarding possible data sources for input and output prices (Eurostat, Economic Accounts, and Agriculture). A participant also suggested that the use of an input distance function might allow allocative and technical efficiencies to be disentangled from the cost frontier results.
Prof. Surry also offered to write a framework for the final synthesis of the regional case study.
Case studies
Partners from Sweden, Germany and Hungary presented results from their desk research.
8.Discussion
Timelines for various tasks and deliverables were discussed.
It was agreed that the timing and location of the policy workshop would be finalised at the next meeting.
The meeting in Hungary has been moved to the 2nd – 3rd March
An indicative date for the Uppsala meeting is the 8th June.
Work package 1 is to include a discussion of Pillar 2.
9.Administrative matters
Participants should sign any emails that are sent to the group and include an email address. This will reduce the number of emails that everyone receives from CARERA members.
Please also review your expenditures. The commission is expecting us to have spent half of the available funds by the end of the first year of the project.
Participants who produce academic or other non-CARERA publications from their work on the project please remember to include an acknowledgement.
Also a request that common backgrounds are selected for presented materials.
Participants please also include an extended summary to any submitted reports.
Timeline of “To Do List”Responsible Partner / Deadline / Supervision
1 / Submission of the presentations / All presenters / 30/10/06 / AUTH
2 / Theoretical Backgrounds / IT, Crete, NL, UK / 30/11/06 / AUTH
3 / Completion (rough draft)
D1 / UK / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D2 / UK / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D3 / IT (HU) / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D6 / IT / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D8 / NL / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D4 / IT (HU) / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D7 / GR (AUTH) / 30/11/06 / AUTH
D9 / IT / 28/02/07 / AUTH
4 / Response on W6 questionnaire and a page describing the new regime and select the three farm activities / GR, HU, NL / 15/11/06 / Crete
5 / Case Study Desk Research First Drafts / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 30/11/2006 / UK
6 / Semi-structured interview protocol / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 30/11/2006 / UK
7 / Group Discussion Protocol / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 30/11/2006 / UK
8 / Interview/ group discussion analysis protocol / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 30/11/2006 / UK
9 / Instructions on Principles followed to I-O questionnaires and identifying important sectors (superior data) / AUTH / 15/12/2006 / AUTH
10 / Final Draft of the WP6 questionnaire / GR, HU,NL / 15/12/2006 / Crete
11 / Interview/group discussions reports. First draft / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 28/02/2007 / UK
12 / Completion of a regional I-O- Mechanical / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / 31/01/2007 / AUTH
13 / Completion of a regional I-O- final / GR, GER, UK, HU, IT, SW / AUTH
14 / 4th Meeting in Budapest, Hungary / ALL / 2-3/3/2007 / HU
15 / Completion of the Survey on Intentions and Perceptions / GR, HU, NL / 30/04/2007 / HU
16 / Info for the WP5 on employment impacts of 2003 reform (quantitative estimates of direct employment) / UK / 30/04/2007 / UK
17 / 5th Meeting in Uppsala / ALL / 8-9/6/2007 / SW
18 / Cross-case comparative case study report draft / UK / 30/6/2007 / UK
19 / Policy Workshop at Wageningen / UK / 30/9/2007 / UK
20 / Scenario analysis / UK / 30/9/2007 / UK
21 / D14 report draft / UK / 30/11/2007 / UK
1