• Login
    View Item 
    •   T-Stór
    • Teagasc End-of-Project Reports
    • REDP End of Project Reports
    • View Item
    •   T-Stór
    • Teagasc End-of-Project Reports
    • REDP End of Project Reports
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of T-StórCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsFunderThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsFunderProfilesView

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Information

    Deposit AgreementLicense

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Direct Payment Measures, competitiveness, farm and rural area viability.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    eopr-4001.pdf
    Size:
    177.0Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Frawley, J.P.
    Keeney, Mary
    Keyword
    Farm direct payments
    Effectiveness
    farm efficiency
    Competitiveness
    viability
    Date
    1999-08-01
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Statistics
    Display Item Statistics
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11019/1321
    Citation
    Frawley, J.P., Keeney, M., Direct Payment Measures, competitiveness, farm and rural area viability, End of Project Reports, Teagasc, 1999.
    Abstract
    Direct payments are recurring non-market transfers to farmers whether they are production related or not. There are three main types: (a) compensatory allowances (headage), (b) premia and (c) agri-environmental payments. In 1998 total payments amounted to £967.3 million, up from £158.4 million in 1992. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of these payments in maintaining farm units, their implications for farm efficiency and competitiveness and their impact on sustaining viable farm units and rural areas. Data from the National Farm Survey shows the average level of payment was £6,670 in 1997 but varied substantially by farm size. For instance, farms over 100 ha on average received £28,207 in contrast with £3,305 for farms between 10 and 20 ha. Similarly, the distribution of payments by different farm systems shows considerable variation with tillage farmers receiving £15,760 and cattle farms receiving less than £6,000. The most significant feature, however, is the extent of the dependency of farm incomes on direct payments. For instance, on tillage and drystock farms these payments represented close to, or even exceeded the family farm income earned. This means that the income from sales are just about sufficient to cover the costs of production; the cheque in the post being the farm income. Without direct payments large segments of the farm population would operate at a loss; a situation which obviously could not be sustained. The impact of direct payments on farm efficiency and competitiveness is not so clear cut. Analysis of 1996 NFS data shows that the response on cattle farms to increased levels of direct payments was to reduce farm output. However, in terms of farm practice the dominant response was to increase stock numbers and farm inputs, such as feed and fertiliser. This latter response can be taken as adjustments to ensure sufficient stock numbers to maximise the level of payments and not necessarily a contradiction of reduced output responses. For instance the dominant anticipated response to a decoupled payment system is a reduction in farm inputs and stock numbers, a response associated with the more progressive sector of farmers. Notwithstanding the present level of these payments it is clear that the viability of farm units on most small to medium-sized drystock farms can not be assured in a farm context only. Increasingly farmers and their spouses are opting for off-farm employment to supplement their household incomes and to sustain the viability of the family farm unit. Ultimately the optimum use of family labour which is marginal or surplus to farm activities, is deployment off the farm; this clearly has a positive influence on the viability of rural areas.
    Collections
    REDP End of Project Reports

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.