Skip Navigation



European Review of Agricultural Economics Advance Access published online on November 30, 2006
European Review of Agricultural Economics, doi:10.1093/erae/jbl027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
33/4/562    most recent
jbl027v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pokrivcak, J.
Right arrow Articles by Swinnen, J. F. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press and Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics 2006; all rights reserved. For permissions, please email journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The status quo bias and reform of the Common Agricultural Policy: impact of voting rules, the European Commission and external changes

Jan Pokrivcak1, Christophe Crombez2,3 and Johan F. M. Swinnen2

1 Slovak Agricultural University, Nitra, Slovakia
2 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
3 Stanford University, California, USA

Corresponding author: Jan Pokrivcak, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, Department of Economics, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 949 01 Nitra, Slovakia. E-mail: , jp02{at}fem.uniag.sk

Received January 2003; Revision received September 2006. We develop a formal model of EU decision-making on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The model is used to evaluate under what conditions CAP reform occurs and what the influence of the European Commission (Commission) is on CAP reform. We find that the voting and amendment rules in the Council of the European Union, the number of policy instruments and external changes have important impacts on the occurrence and extent of CAP reform and on the influence of the Commission. Stricter voting rules increase the status quo bias and reduce Commission influence, whereas stricter amendment rules increase both the status quo bias and Commission influence. More significant external change results in more reform and more Commission influence.

Keywords: political economy, agricultural policy, political process, policy reform


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.