it.euronews.com
EU Replaces Common Agricultural Policy with Single Fund, Shifting Power to Member States
The European Commission is replacing the Common Agricultural Policy (PAC)'s two-pillar system with a single fund, merging it with the Cohesion Policy and shifting significant implementation power to member states, effective from 2028.
- What are the immediate consequences of the European Commission's restructuring of the Common Agricultural Policy (PAC)?
- The European Commission is replacing the Common Agricultural Policy (PAC) with a single fund, merging previously separate financial tools and ending the two-pillar system. This will integrate PAC into a single European fund including Cohesion Policy, subjecting two-thirds of the EU budget to the same financial rules. A safeguard ensures a minimum quota for agricultural objectives.
- How will the elimination of the PAC's two-pillar structure affect the implementation and monitoring of rural development policies?
- This restructuring aims for administrative simplification by merging the PAC with the Cohesion Policy into a single fund. While maintaining direct payments and crisis reserves, it shifts significant power to member states, potentially leading to inconsistencies in agricultural strategies across the EU. The elimination of the two-pillar structure weakens community-level control.
- What are the potential long-term implications of the increased national control over agricultural spending for the overall coherence and effectiveness of the EU's agricultural policies?
- The shift towards national control risks a decline in the 'common' aspect of the PAC. The increased flexibility and national implementation could lead to diverse agricultural strategies across member states, potentially impacting the EU's agricultural cohesion and market stability. The long-term impact on the agricultural sector's prioritization within the EU budget also remains uncertain.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the changes to the CAP as a "revolution" and emphasizes the elimination of the two-pillar structure. While acknowledging the Commissioner's description as an "evolution," the narrative uses stronger, more dramatic language that might lead readers to perceive the reforms as more disruptive than intended. The headline and opening sentences focus on the transformative nature of the changes, potentially overshadowing the continuity of certain aspects of the policy.
Language Bias
The article uses strong, emotionally charged language such as "traumatico" (traumatic), "Grande Fusione" (Great Fusion), and "rivoluzione istituzionale" (institutional revolution). While these terms might be intended to highlight the significance of the reforms, they also convey a negative or alarmist tone that may influence reader perception. More neutral terms could be used to convey the same information, for example, instead of "traumatico," a more neutral description of the ending of an era could be provided.
Bias by Omission
The analysis lacks information on the perspectives of various stakeholders beyond farmers and the EU Commission. Missing are the views of consumers, environmental groups, and other relevant actors who may be affected by the changes to the CAP. The potential impact on food security and the environment is not explicitly addressed.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between simplification and the potential marginalization of the agricultural sector. It implies that simplification inevitably leads to marginalization, neglecting the possibility of streamlining processes without diminishing the importance of agriculture. The framing also suggests a stark choice between EU integration and national sovereignty, ignoring the potential for collaborative approaches.
Sustainable Development Goals
The reformed CAP aims to maintain direct payments to support farmers' income, contributing to poverty reduction in rural areas. While the restructuring introduces uncertainty, the commitment to maintaining income support suggests a continued positive impact on poverty reduction, although the extent may vary across member states.