Page 57 - Microsoft Word - CEU_MA_Thesis_ARDI_PRIKS_FINAL_v1.3.docx

While the adjustment scenario would understandably avoid radical changes to the direct payments, it is somewhat surprising that controversial market measures would be only “simplified and streamlined” within the framework of the current system and this would be done “without changing support levels” (The Commission 2011, 40), despite the fact that, desired rents could be transferred to farmers through other, less distorted, mechanisms than market instruments. Furthermore, in the name of environmental concerns, even coupled payments would be maintained in those member states which currently use them to support suckler cows, sheep and goat gazing (The Commission 2011, 41). The Rural Development (which actually has seen its proposed budget for 2014-2020 fall), would follow the Health Check model of a moderate increase under the adjustment scenario. However, Rural Development funding would be constrained by the overall CAP budget and the distribution of funds between the Member States would remain the same as it is now in the post Health Check period (The Commission 2011, 41). Integration of ‘green’ concerns and equity concerns scenario A second, more ambitious scenario called ‘integration scenario’ goes in many ways in the opposite direction than all past reforms. It entails maintaining expenditure in the first—direct payments—pillar under the new popular ideology of ‘greening’, which of course, also “requires an appropriate budget” (The Commission 2011, 38). If the adjustment scenario were only to maintain the levels of support currently afforded to farmers, then the integration scenario would go further “strengthening the role of producers through appropriate market instruments” (The Commission 2011, 38). Therefore, this would be a regression as much as the previous reforms have taken the CAP away from market instruments, which under this scenario would only be 57