DOCSLIB.ORG

Keeping the Name on the Land: the Survival of Family Farming in the UK

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Keeping the Name on the Land: the Survival of Family Farming in the UK KEEPING THE NAME ON THE LAND: THE FAMILY FARM AND ITS SURVIVAL THROUGH PERIODS OF POSTWAR AGRICULTURAL CHANGE C A PERKINS A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the University’s requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 University of Worcester 1 Acknowledgements This PhD is based a period of fieldwork at a single family farm in Ceredigion, Wales. This farm has been given the pseudonym ‘Fferm Ysgawen’ in this thesis, which refers to an occasion where I sent out on a sunny afternoon to pick “some good, you know” branches of elderflower to make homemade champagne. This shows how the family of Fferm Ysgawen spent time involving me in their daily lives and celebrations, teaching me about farm work, encouraging me to learn Welsh and introducing me to others as “the student”. The family farm was the perfect context for this PhD and the themes that it explores – internal dynamics, technology, external connections and an intense longing to keep the family name on the land. I hope you can hear their story resonate through the pages. On a personal level, fieldwork at Fferm Ysgawen was one of the most challenging (farm work is tough, for a “townie”) yet enjoyable and intensely rewarding times. There’s little more I can say except “Diolch yn fawr Fferm Ysgawen”. The PhD research led to me to meeting family farmers across the country in Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, London and Kinross. Thank you to all these farmers who were so generous with their time and knowledge. The study was supervised by Professor Nick Evans (Director of Studies, University of Worcester) and Dr Carol Morris (Second Supervisor, University of Nottingham). Both have spent so much time providing critical feedback, advice and comments with understanding and encouragement. Thanks should also go to those working in agricultural geography (and related disciplines) at the University of Worcester and beyond who have provided comments and criticism on elements of this thesis presented though publications and papers. Thank you to Amy Woodget who processed the data and for the maps in Chapter 5. Thanks also to members of staff at the Graduate Research School and all of my friends and fellow students 'on the corridor'. If I mention one, I'll forget another, so I hope you know who you are. This should also extend to those who have studied (at the University of Wales, Lampeter), worked (at the University of Worcester), researched (the 'Our Living History' project in the South Teme Valley) and learned (students on the 2012-2013 Countryside Conservation and Agricultural Change module) alongside me over the years. The encouragement and commitment of my family, partner and family friends to this study has been instrumental to its completion. A special thank you to Mam, Dad, Amy, Chris, Nan, Pam, Andy and Eileen. 2 CONTENTS 1. Introduction 9 1.1 Post-war productivism and hypotheses of the demise of the family farm 11 1.2 Agricultural change since productivism and different opportunities for the family farm to survive 16 1.3 Anticipations of future agricultural change and the family farm. 22 1.4 PhD study 25 1.5 Aims and Objectives 27 2. Literature Review 29 2.1 Defining the family farm 32 2.2 Post-war productivism and hypotheses of the demise of the family farm 37 2.3 Agricultural change since productivism and different opportunities for the family farm to survive 50 2.4 Anticipations of future agricultural change and the family farm 57 3. Conceptual Framework 66 3.1 Internal dynamics of the family farm 69 3.2 Technology and the family farm 86 3.3 The external connections of the family farm 94 3.4 A longing to survive on the family farm 100 3 4. Methodology 106 4.1 Entry into the field 109 4.2 Ethnography 121 4.3 Multi-sited ethnography 133 4.4 Positionality 135 4.4 Analysis of the fieldwork material 145 5. Study Area 151 5.1 Ceredigion 152 5.2 Farming policy, schemes and support 155 5.3 Farming in Ceredigion 160 5.4 Research in Ceredigion and neighbouring areas 173 6. Character List 181 7. Internal Dynamics 188 7.1 The background of Fferm Ysgawen 189 7.2 Farm family relationships and motivations 200 7.3 Seasonal Activities and Annual Events 208 7.4 The daily routine of Fferm Ysgawen 216 8. Technology 225 8.1 Perceptions, definitions and understandings of technology at Fferm Ysgawen 226 8.2 Essential ‘technology’ 229 4 8.3 ‘Hidden’ technologies 234 8.4 Multiple uses of one technology 235 8.5 Reluctance / non-use of technology for agricultural purposes 239 8.6 Implications for survival 242 9. External Dynamics 245 9.1 The external connections of Fferm Ysgawen. 247 9.2 Fferm Ysgawen and the agri-food system 255 9.3 The social family farm 266 9.4 The introduction of new technology through the external connections 269 9.5 Rejection and changes to external connections over time 275 9.6 External connections and the survival of the family farm 279 10. Conclusion 281 10.1 Contributions to understandings of the family farm 282 10.2 The methodological contribution of ethnography 297 10.3 Farm family survival and neo-productivism 305 5 FIGURES Figure 1: Whatmore et al.'s (1986a) typology of farms. 15 Figure 2: Gasson and Errington's (1993) representation of a farm family business 35 Figure 3: Bowler's conceptualisation of the industrialisation of agriculture 39 Figure 4: Diagram of the conceptual framework 104 Figure 5: Diagram of the elements of the conceptual framework 105 Figure 6: Example of data analysis 149 Figure 7: The counties of Wales 153 Figure 8: Population numbers in unitary authorities of Wales 154 Figure 9: Graph to show the number of people employed in different types of occupation and industry in 2001 in Ceredigion 161 Figure 10: Data selected for description of farming type 165 Figure 11: 2010 distribution of crops and fallow 168 Figure 12: 2010 distribution of cattle 169 Figure 13: 2010 distribution of sheep 170 Figure 14: Kinship diagram of Fferm Ysgawen 181 Figure 15: Table of Participants 182 Figure 16: Annual routine of sheep farming: ewes 211 Figure 17: Annual routine of sheep farming: rams 212 Figure 18: Annual routine of sheep farming: lambs 212 Figure 19: The daily routine of the family farm 218 Figure 21: Using the slurry tanker to carry water 237 Figure 22: The external connections of Fferm Ysgawen. 250 6 Figure 23: External connections between Fferm Ysgawen and the agri-food system. 257 7 ABSTRACT This PhD is about the family farm in the United Kingdom. It investigates the reasons behind their survival since the end of World War Two and the current day. The research is situated in a gap in knowledge within agricultural geography that exists due to an inadequacy to explore effectively the family farm and its continuation. This is related to two strands of research. First, analysts of the era between the mid-1940s and early-mid 1980s argued that the inability of the family farm to access funding through external connections to fund technology would result in their extinction. Second, activities such as farm diversification, which have been suggested by proponents of agricultural phases since the early-mid 1980s such as 'post-productivism', have failed to provide real options for family farmers to survive without food production. This PhD acknowledges the role of the family farm itself, technology and external connections to its persistence. It creates a theoretical framework grounded in an appreciation of the everyday and mundane, which justifies concentration on a single family farm located in Ceredigion, Wales, UK. The study implemented ethnography and multi-sited ethnography by living and working on a family farm and using the complementary methods of participant observation, focused discussions and in-the-field interviewing. The study found that family farmers utilise their own creativity, resources and abilities to engage with technology and external connections in diverse, multiple and unexpected ways. These practices were related to motivations such as maintaining a good way of life, producing food and supporting the local community. In turn, these motivations were connected to a deeply embedded emotional longing to survive and keep the name on the land. 8 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Family farming is a significant element of the appearance of the countryside, food and agricultural sector, and culture of the United Kingdom. The most recent data available from DEFRA (2013) records that the total utilised agricultural area (UAA) of the UK is 17.3 million hectares. This means that with the total area of the UK standing at 243,610 agricultural land use amounts to 71%1. Agricultural geographers have discussed that family farms are responsible for most of the farming activity on this land (Lobley et al., 2010; Gasson et al., 1988). Indeed, survey work has found that the percentage of agricultural land operated by family farms may be as much as 86% in some areas of England (Lobley et al., 2010). Gasson et al. (1988, p.1) state that ‘the great majority of UK farms are run as family businesses’. This ownership of a substantial amount of UK land means that family farming makes an important economic and productive contribution to the agricultural sector. Brookfield and Parsons (2007; preface xiii) argue that family farmers ‘have a central place in very large economic sectors’. Agricultural geographers have conceptualised family farms as important forms of labour relations and decision-making units. More recently, they have considered the role of family farming in the culture of the UK. As Lobley et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • D5.1 Report on Analysis on Rural Newcomers, New Entrants Into Farming and Successor in Farming
    RURALIZATION The opening of rural areas to renew rural generations, jobs and farms D5.1 Report on analysis on rural newcomers, new entrants into farming and successor in farming 2 D5.1 COMPARATIVE REPORT Version history Ver. Date Comments/Changes Author/Reviewer 0.1 23-12-2019 Discussion about the basic terms UNICAL, UNIDEB, TEAGASC/ and main statistics available from Consortium & SAB the national teams 0.2 10-02-2020 T 5.1 Input paper (first version) UNIDEB, UNICAL, TEAGASC 0.3 20-02-2020 T 5.1 Input paper (final version) UNIDEB, UNICAL, TEAGASC 0.4 30-03-2020 Long list of promising practices Consortium 0.5 31-03-2020 Selection of promising practices UNICAL, UNIDEB 0.6 15-04-2020 T 5.1 Country reports Consortium 0.7 14-07-2020 First draft working document UNICAL, UNIDEB, TEAGASC 0.8 21-07-2020 Minor revisions made based on UNICAL, UNIDEB, TEAGASC/ feedback Consortium & SAB 0.9 31-07-2020 Significant revisions made based UNICAL, UNIDEB, TEAGASC on feedback 1.0 31-07-2020 Final version UNICAL, UNIDEB, TEAGASC/ Consortium & SAB 2.0 22-04-2021 Final version resubmitted after UNICAL, UNIDEB receiving comments from the EC RURALIZATION GRANT AGREEMENT NO 817642 3 D5.1REPORT ON ANALYSIS ON RURAL NEWCOMERS, NEW ENTRANTS INTOFARMING AND SUCCESSOR IN FARMING Project Acronym RURALIZATION Project Title The opening of rural areas to renew rural generations, jobs and farms Project Number 817642 Instrument Research and Innovation Action (RIA) Topic RUR-01-2018-2019 Building modern rural policies on long-term visions and societal engagement Project Start
    [Show full text]
  • A Strategy for the Sustainable Use of Plant Protection Products and Strategy Action Plans: March 2006 3 DEF-PB13035-Pestplan 30/4/2008 13:45 Page 4
    DEF-PB13035-PestPlan 30/4/2008 13:45 Page A communisis The leading print partner C M Y K www.defra.gov.uk JOB LOCATION: PRINERGY 1 DISCLAIMER APPROVER The accuracy and the content of this file is the responsibility of the Approver. Please authorise approval only if you wish to proceed to print. Communisis PMS cannot accept liability for errors once the file has been printed. PRINTER This colour bar is UK Pesticides Strategy: produced manually all end users must check final separations to verify A Strategy for the Sustainable Use colours before printing. of Plant Protection Products DEF-PB13035-PestPlan 30/4/2008 13:45 Page B Co 1. Int 2. Bac 3. Sco 4. Ob 5. Str 6. Wo 7. The 8. Int 9. De 10. Th 11. Sc 12. In 13. Re 14. St Anne Anne Anne Anne Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Nobel House Anne 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR Telephone 020 7238 6000 Website: www.defra.gov.uk © Crown copyright 2006 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and departmental logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to The Information Policy Team, Office of Public Sector Information, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected] Product code PB 13035 DEF-PB13035-PestPlan 30/4/2008 13:45 Page 1 Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • IJAM Volume 7
    DOI: 10.5836/ijam/2018-07-01 An appreciation of John Nix Emeritus Professor John Sydney Nix 1927 - 2018 Professor John Nix, who died on March 15th 2018, results of his research directly to individual farmer had an outstanding career as the leading figure of his clients. generation in the study of farm business management. This gave him a unique insight into the practical Through his teaching, research, publications, public data needs of farm planners and was a stimulus to the speaking and involvement with organisations, such as production of The Farm Management Pocketbook, the the Institute for Agricultural Management, his aim was first edition of which came out in 1966. This publication, to improve the application of management skills to now titled the ‘John Nix Farm Management Pocket- agricultural businesses at a practical level. He was book’ and under the editorship of Graham Redman of remarkably successful in that endeavor and in doing Anderson’s, is currently in its 48th edition. Estimated so he became a household name amongst the farming to have sold a quarter of a million copies by the time community. His influence has been both far reaching and John retired in 1989, it became a standard reference for profound in the UK but it has also been significant business in UK agriculture. internationally. He always emphasized that the data was for planning John was brought up in an urban environment on a purposes only and should always be modified if local Council Estate in South London. An academic high conditions or knowledge suggested it. He was sometimes achiever from a very early age, he gained a scholarship to frustrated by the way in which figures from the Pocket- read Economics at Exeter University.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Payment Scheme Rules 2020
    rch for BP ea S S 2 0 2 0 0 2 f o 0 r 2 e v o t e r g y n t i h t i a n l g e r Basic Payment Scheme: rules for 2020 Get everything you need to know about the Basic Payment Scheme 2020: www.gov.uk/rpa/bps2020 Claim BPS nline Use built-in checks to help you get your application right and get an instant receipt. Do more than just apply: The online application and • check your entitlements online and guidance is very good and easy to transfer them use. • view maps and aerial photography • print maps of individual land parcels BPS 2019 applicant • transfer and remove land parcels online Contents Updates for 2020 1 Key dates for BPS 2020 3 Making an application 4 Who can claim BPS 9 Land 10 Common land and shared grazing 27 Entitlements 32 Greening 36 Greening: crop diversification on arable land 39 Greening: Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) on arable land 42 Greening: permanent grassland 68 Eligible crops 69 ‘Young’ and ‘new’ farmers 88 The young farmer payment 91 Inspections 94 Payments, reductions and penalties 95 Business structure 110 Land in more than one part of the UK (‘cross border’) 111 More information 121 Version 2 - Penalties for over claims have been simplified. See updated information on page 104 Version 3 - Reductions and penatlies section for cross border farmers updated on page 119 Basic Payment Scheme 2020 - Updates for 2020 Updates for 2020 The Basic Payment Scheme (BPS), including greening and the young farmer payment, will continue for the whole 2020 scheme year with available funding the same as for 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • UK National Report (WP 2 - Deliverable 2.2)
    UK National report (WP 2 - Deliverable 2.2) Pictures: Inshore fishing boats, Cornwall & Dairy cow, Somerset Authors: Damian MAYE, James KIRWAN, Mauro VIGANI, Dilshaad BUNDHOO and Hannah CHISWELL Organisations April 2018 H2020-SFS-2014-2 SUFISA Grant agreement 635577 1 UK National report Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 12 1 Introduction and methods ........................................................................... 40 2 Media Content Analysis ............................................................................... 42 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 42 2.2 The predominance of price volatility in media discourses about UK agriculture .... 42 2.3 Inshore fisheries ...................................................................................................... 43 2.4 The dairy sector ....................................................................................................... 46 3 Brexit and the UK agri-food sector ................................................................ 50 3.1 Brexit: introduction ................................................................................................. 50 3.2 Brexit: fisheries, including inshore fisheries ............................................................ 53 3.2.1 Fisheries management ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Support for Crofting a Report Prepared for the Crofting Commission Gwyn Jones
    Support for Crofting A report prepared for the Crofting Commission Gwyn Jones Breacais, Strath parish (Richard Dorrell, Creative Commons Licence) Support for Crofting A report prepared for the Crofting Commission Gwyn Jones European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism Penygraig, Llanfair Clydogau, Lampeter SA48 8LJ 2018 This report was commissioned by the Crofting Commission but the opinions within do not necessarily reflect those of the Commission nor those of the Scottish Government. Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 1 List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 6 1 Purpose of this report ................................................................................................................... 10 2 The Scottish Government’s objectives for crofting ...................................................................... 10 3 The state of the ‘crofting system’ ................................................................................................. 14 3.1 Estimating the degree
    [Show full text]
  • Rural Payments Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2007-2008
    Rural Payments Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2007/2008 Rural Payments Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2007/2008 Presented to Parliament pursuant to Section 7(2) of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 21 July 2008 HC521 London: The Stationery Offi ce £18.55 © Crown Copyright 2008 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specifi ed. Where we have identifi ed any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to: Offi ce of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 978 0 10 295376 3 2 Contents Foreword 5–6 Business Review 7–15 Performance Against Targets 16 Public Interest 17–20 Management Structure 21–22 Remuneration Report 23–27 Statement of Accounting Offi cer’s Responsibilities 28 Statement on Internal Control 29–35 Certifi cate of the Comptroller and Auditor General 36–38 to the House of Commons Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General 39–40 to the House of Commons Accounts 41–81 Glossary 82–83 Contents 3 4 Foreword The Rural Payments Agency (RPA) has made good progress during 2007/08 towards our aim of delivering a consistent service to our customers.
    [Show full text]
  • UK National Report (WP 2 - Deliverable 2.2)
    UK National report (WP 2 - Deliverable 2.2) Pictures: Inshore fishing boats, Cornwall & Dairy cow, Somerset Authors: Damian MAYE, James KIRWAN, Mauro VIGANI, Dilshaad BUNDHOO and Hannah CHISWELL Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of Gloucestershire, UK April 2018 H2020-SFS-2014-2 SUFISA This project has received funds from the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 635577. Responsibility for the information and views set out in this report lies entirely with the authors. 1 UK National report Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 12 1 Introduction and methods ........................................................................... 40 2 Media Content Analysis ............................................................................... 42 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 42 2.2 The predominance of price volatility in media discourses about UK agriculture .... 42 2.3 Inshore fisheries ...................................................................................................... 43 2.4 The dairy sector ....................................................................................................... 46 3 Brexit and the UK agri-food sector ................................................................ 50 3.1 Brexit: introduction ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cultivating the Capital Food Growing and the Planning System in London January 2010
    Planning and Housing Committee Cultivating the Capital Food growing and the planning system in London January 2010 Planning and Housing Committee Cultivating the Capital Food growing and the planning system in London January 2010 Copyright Greater London Authority January 2010 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN This publication is printed on recycled paper Cover photograph credit Paul Watling Planning and Housing Committee Members Jenny Jones Green, Chair Nicky Gavron Labour, Deputy Chair Tony Arbour Conservative Gareth Bacon Conservative Andrew Boff Conservative Steve O'Connell Conservative Navin Shah Labour Mike Tuffrey Liberal Democrat The review’s terms of reference were: • To assess how effectively the planning system supports and encourages agriculture in London, with a focus on land use for commercial food growing; and • To establish what changes could be made to the planning system to foster agriculture and encourage more food to be commercially grown in the capital. Assembly Secretariat contacts Alexandra Beer, Assistant Scrutiny Manager 020 7983 4947 [email protected] Katy Shaw, Committee Team Leader 020 7983 4416 [email protected] Dana Gavin, Communications Manager 020 7983 4603 [email protected] Michael Walker, Administrative Officer 020 7983 4525 [email protected] 6 Contents Chair’s foreword 9 Executive summary 11 1. Introduction and background 13 2. The importance of agriculture 16 3. Agriculture and the planning system 21 4. Other measures to promote economic viability 32 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Area of Crops Grown for Bioenergy in England and the UK: 2008 - 2013 Key Messages
    Published 25th November 2014 Area of Crops Grown For Bioenergy in England and the UK: 2008 - 2013 Key Messages An estimated 51 thousand hectares of agricultural land in the UK were used for bioenergy in 2013. The area of crops grown for bioenergy equated to 0.8% of all arable land in the UK in 2013. Just over 80% (42 thousand hectares) of the land used for bioenergy in 2013 was for biofuel (biodiesel and bioethanol) crops for the UK road transport market. Provisional estimates indicate that 787 thousand tonnes of UK produced crops were used for the UK road transport market in 2013/14. In 2014, maize grown for use in anaerobic digestion accounted for 17% (29,373 hectares) of the total maize area in England, which was 0.5% of England’s total arable area. Figures relating to biofuel used for road transport in 2013/14 are provisional based on the data currently available. This shows that, of the total volume of renewable fuel supplied in 2013/14, 99.8% (1,740 million litres) has so far been demonstrated to meet the sustainability requirements (see Annex B for more details). The next update to this statistical release is anticipated in autumn 2015. Once confirmed the exact date will be published on the internet at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/announcements?utf8=%E2%9C%93&keywords=&topics%5 B%5D=&organisations%5B%5D=department-for-environment-food-rural- affairs&from_date=&to_date=&commit=Refresh+results Revisions Following advice from The Department for Transport, the conversion factors used to derive crop tonnages are now sourced from the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation Guidance at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rtfo-guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Future of Farming Review Report
    www.gov.uk/defra Future Of Farming Review Report July 2013 © Crown copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected] This document/publication is also available on our website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this document/publication should be sent to us at: [email protected] PB 13982 FOREWORD David Fursdon, Chair of the Future of Farming Review When someone visits a farm they will look for what is important to them. Everyone will look for different things. I am normally interested in the people. It is largely up to them whether or not it succeeds. This review is also about people. It is about new entrants certainly but a „new‟ entrant will before long become „old‟. So this review is also, inevitably, about progression. Fortunately as a country we have now accepted that food security is an issue. We also recognise that our environment is a priceless asset. Finally we recognise that our relationship with Europe is ever changing and we may have to look solely to world markets if our farming businesses are to survive long term. That will require the best new entrants to find ways to bring their new skills into agriculture and those in agriculture to continue to improve also.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 EUROPEAN UNION: ESTIMATES of SUPPORT to AGRICULTURE Contact Person
    EUROPEAN UNION: ESTIMATES OF SUPPORT TO AGRICULTURE Contact person: Morvarid BAGHERZADEH Email: [email protected] Tel: 33 (0)1 45 24 95 54 Fax: 33 (0)1 44 30 61 01 DEFINITIONS AND SOURCES Table 1. Agricultural Support Estimates / Total Transfers contains country Total Support Estimate (TSE) and derived indicators, which cover all agricultural production, i.e. all agricultural commodities produced in the country. Definitions of basic data sets refer to the specific programmes applied in the country. For the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE), each policy measure is classified according to implementation criteria, which include: the transfer basis of support (output, input, area/animal numbers/receipts/income, and non-commodity criteria); whether support is based on current or non-current basis; whether production is required or not to receive payment. Each policy measure is also assigned several “labels” indicating additional implementation criteria. "MPS commodities", which vary across countries, are those for which the market price support is explicitly calculated in Tables 4.1 – 4.21. Table 2. Breakdown of PSE by Commodity and Other Transfers provides a breakdown of the total PSE into four categories reflecting the flexibility given to farmers regarding which commodity to produce within the various policy measures. These categories are: Single Commodity Transfers (SCT); Group Commodity Transfers (GCT); All Commodity Transfers (ACT); and Other Transfers to Producers (OTP). All data sets in Table 2 come from Tables 1 and 3.1 – 3.21 where definitions are included. Tables 3.1 – 3.21 Producer Single Commodity Transfers contain producer SCT by commodity, which are calculated for the European Union for the following commodities: wheat (common wheat, durum wheat), maize, other grains (barley, oats), rice, oilseeds (soybeans, sunflower, rapeseed), sugar, milk, beef and veal, pig meat, poultry meat, and eggs (Tables 3.1-3.20) provided that the value of production of that commodity exceeds 1% of the total value of production.
    [Show full text]