Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
agriculture but also affect nature policy or landscape policy objectives positively, to make
sure a balance is found between the different sectors in rural areas. A relevant question is
therefore which costs (and benefits) are explicitly included in the CEA. For agriculture it
is important that positive side-effects of measures are included in the CEA. For instance,
if buffer strips are implemented to avoid the emission of pesticides into the surface water,
these buffer strips will have a positive effect on landscape and nature. Valuation of these
secondary benefits of WFD measures will prioritise those measures that contribute to
reaching a balance between agriculture and ecosystems and to multifunctional agriculture.
The exact definition of disproportion is important to direct the economic analysis.
Economics is only there to inform decision makers; economics can provide information
for the political balancing process to establish whether a measure has disproportionate
effects. Will disproportion be judged at the level of sectors or regions? If it is judged at
sector level, are subsectors considered within agriculture or will agriculture be treated as
one sector: how many subsectors will be distinguished? What is the carrying capacity of a
sector, how many firms may be bankrupted? It is important to make a decision on which
subsectors or regions need to be analysed separately in the 'disproportion' analysis.
It is clear that before even starting to explore possible measures, certain agreement
has to be made on several basic principles. When finally making decisions on the
allocation of costs and benefits, it is important to realise what methodological steps on
what subjects, sometimes implicitly discussed, have been taken to acquire insight into the
different costs and benefits.
6. Conclusions
The Netherlands is a unique country with an abundance of water, where water quality
issues are more at the forefront than water quantity issues. The EU Water Framework
Directive (WFD) offers opportunities, but it also has far-reaching effects for the
Netherlands. Therefore a pragmatic implementation (feasible and affordable) is
important. It is a great mission to find the right balance in the implementation for
different subjects and at different levels and subjects: at international, national and
regional level, between the different sectors, and between the costs and benefits of the
WFD. Especially, the apparent discrepancy between agriculture and nature is the biggest
challenge for the ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality in the Netherlands in
search of a pragmatic implementation.
The Netherlands notes that a number of decisions need to be taken at different levels,
which will affect the ability to make balanced decisions later about cost-effective
programmes of measures to comply with the Directive. To be able to make balanced
decisions at national level, uniformity to a certain extent in information about costs and
benefits, partly delivered by the regions, is necessary. To a degree, direction of the state
therefore is necessary for methodological decisions and to attain sufficient insight at
different levels about, for instance, consequences for allocation of costs and benefits.
However, at the same time it is necessary to ensure a proper scope for regional diversity.
An important issue, which is easily underestimated, is achieving public support from the
numerous actors involved. Only this way an extensive exploration of programmes of
measures can be made, to realise a pragmatic implementation, instead of directly
focussing on (regional/personal/sectoral) desirable outcomes. Communication therefore is
an essential part of the complex and often technical process.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search