Volume 128 - Issue 2

The reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the period after 2027 has reopened fundamental questions regarding the purpose, governance and financing of agricultural policy in the European Union. This paper argues that the contemporary CAP is justified by a combination of objectives relating to food security and resilience, environmental stewardship, territorial cohesion, and competitiveness and innovation. It examines how these competing rationales shape the current reform debate and assesses them using the principle of European value added. While all four rationales provide legitimate grounds for public intervention, they differ in the extent to which they justify common European financing. The paper argues that the strongest case for EU expenditure arises where collective action problems, cross-border spillovers or economies of scale are most evident, notably in environmental sustainability, crisis preparedness, research, innovation and knowledge exchange. It concludes that the central challenge facing the future CAP will be the prioritisation of expenditure within an increasingly constrained budget. The greater flexibility proposed for Member States in the post- 2027 CAP will make the prioritisation of European value added more difficult.

The complexity of the issues that practitioners in the field of agricultural economics encounter is increasing, with agriculture intersecting with most of the challenges that society faces. Policies related to agriculture need to address an increasing number of objectives, while at the same time it is necessary to understand their related trade-offs. How can policy analysts make use of the available quantitative tools to support an evidence-based policymaking process? In this context, collaborative approaches are increasingly recognised as a vital solution. This paper provides a framework for conducting multi-model analysis for policy and encourages its use in the field of agricultural economics. The following elements are crucial to the success of this method: (i) the development of clear conceptual frameworks identifying the core elements of the problem at hand; (ii) the cooperation between researchers in different fields (or modelling teams); (iii) the identification of synergies and overlaps between models; and (iv) the development of linkages between modelling tools in a largely structured manner. Overall, such an approach ensures that modelling outcomes satisfy policymakers’ needs while keeping the modelling tools manageable. The synergistic use of models that are already well-tested in their respective fields enhances the credibility of the results.

The European Commission’s July 2025 Multiannual Financial Framework proposal introduces structural changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the 2028–2034 programming period, raising questions about its alignment with the environmental ambitions of the Green Deal. This paper uses the spatially explicit partial equilibrium model GLOBIOM to assess how the proposed policy shifts alter production incentives and land allocation across EU Member States. We operationalise the reform by linking regional budget envelopes with unit payment rates for the key interventions, including the degressive area-based income support corridor, the consolidated Agri-Environmental and Climate Action (AECA) framework, and expanded coupled income support. Testing Member State implementation strategies ranging from fiscal minimisation to high environmental ambition, we quantify impacts on agricultural production, prices, trade, and greenhouse gas emissions, explicitly capturing the quantity-rationing effects of binding budget constraints. Results show that the aggregate 15% budget cut translates into heterogeneous impacts across instruments and Member States, that payment rate equalisation is the reform’s primary redistributive mechanism, and that without practice conditionality the environmental gains of even ambitious green implementation remain limited.

This article develops a political economy framework to interpret the evolution of rural development policy in Europe. It argues that European rural policy should not be understood as a linear transition from agricultural modernisation to placebased development, but as a layered and contested policy field in which multiple strategies coexist and compete. The paper identifies four ideal-typical strategies: distributive support, agri-food competitiveness, disparity reduction, and holistic place-sensitive development. These strategies are analysed not only as policy paradigms, but also as concrete configurations of instruments, governance arrangements, beneficiaries, delivery mechanisms and financial allocations. Their effectiveness is assessed in relation to two main dimensions: their capacity to reduce territorial disparities and social marginalisation, and their contribution to strengthening the competitiveness and development potential of rural areas. The article shows that distributive and sectoral logics remain resilient because they are supported by established administrative routines, powerful constituencies and policy feedback mechanisms. At the same time, territorial and placesensitive approaches have gained legitimacy in response to depopulation, service decline, rural marginalisation and persistent territorial inequalities, although their consolidation depends on integrated governance, local capacity and multi-fund coordination. The paper further examines how external shocks and crises may rebalance political competition in favour of faster,...