Page 59 - Microsoft Word - CEU_MA_Thesis_ARDI_PRIKS_FINAL_v1.3.docx

would lose out from such an arrangement. Furthermore, while normatively appealing to many, increased degressivity and capping rewards inefficiency in production. As Tangermann (2012, 325) emphaises—when large production units receive lower payments per hectare than smaller production, then these—otherwise more efficient larger production units—will find it more difficult to compete for land than smaller farms. Also, any economic and environmental criteria that would be used to determine redistribution at the Community level will be contested. To make things more complex, the Commission, for its part, has proposed to divide the direct payments into different components, which would be judged separately. To maintain farmers’ rents, a national or regional flat rate basic income support would be distributed in all member states (The Commission 2011, 3). The Commission does not explain in its report why flat rate or other income support is necessary if the goal is to achieve ‘green’ agriculture. The second component would an optional area-based direct payment for naturally disadvantages regions. It can be expected that most member states would argue that most of their agricultural areas are naturally disadvantaged and therefore deserve full support when it comes to this component. The third component, a compulsory further 21 ‘greening’ payments throughout the whole EU, seems (at least on paper ) to be the only one component actually pushing the CAP towards integration of environmental and climate concerns. These payments would be made for complying with non-contractual environmental measures that exceed normal benchmark standards of cross compliance. The final component of direct payments would be a voluntary coupled support for specific sectors. In other words, full decoupling would be partially reversed under this integration scenario. 21 Tangermann (2012, 324) argues that the ‘greening’ of the direct payments “cannot really be considered to be justified on the grounds of objectives related to the environment and climate change.” Instead, ‘greening’ is likely to serve political purpose of justifying farmers’ rents. 59