Policy Evaluation for Climate Mitigations in the European Agricultural Sector—A Comparison of Policy Options at Micro and Macro Level

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to discuss the micro‐ and macro‐outcomes for the standard neoclassical carbon tax (whose burden falls on the producers) versus the implication of a budget neutral, performance‐based EU Common Agricultural Policy ( CAP ) focusing on non‐ CO 2 emission ( N 2 O and CH 4 , measured in CO 2 eq ) reduction, especially in the livestock sector. The subsidy is budget neutral as financed via the current basic payment of the first pillar of the CAP . The policies are applied to the single farm level model FarmDyn to take into account heterogeneity between farms and regions and the macro model MAGNET to take into account market feedback and possible leakage effects. Farm level mitigation potentials and costs from FarmDyn are used to calibrate the EU27 national milk production Marginal Abatement Costs Curves ( MACCs ) in MAGNET . On the other hand, scenario‐specific changes in prices of agricultural inputs and output from MAGNET are used as input in FarmDyn , improving the consistency of the modelling framework. The results of the simulations conducted in this framework show clear conclusions. On the one hand, imposing a standard carbon tax on non‐ CO 2 emissions in the agricultural sector is the most effective method to achieve a greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emission reduction as the carbon tax can lead to significant reduction of total agricultural GHG emissions ( MAGNET ). Nevertheless, this result is connected to several trade‐offs, such as farm income losses in the short term ( FarmDyn ) and losses in agricultural production and employment (different by country in the EU27 ) in the somewhat longer term ( MAGNET ). On the other hand, subsidising the emission abatement costs allows for mitigating almost completely the negative trade‐offs while still allowing a substantial reduction of agricultural emissions. However, subsidies easily result in overcompensation and increased prices of inputs and technologies that mitigate emissions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Published
2025-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.70068
Primary Topic
Agricultural Economics and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Policy Evaluation for Climate Mitigations in the European Agricultural Sector—A Comparison of Policy Options at Micro and Macro Level

Zuzana Smeets Kristkova, David Schäfer, J.F.M. Helming, Hugo Scherer et al.
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Agricultural Economics and Policy
article

Policy Evaluation for Climate Mitigations in the European Agricultural Sector—A Comparison of Policy Options at Micro and Macro Level

Zuzana Smeets Kristkova, David Schäfer, J.F.M. Helming, Hugo Scherer, Elisa Bardazzi
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to discuss the micro‐ and macro‐outcomes for the standard neoclassical carbon tax (whose burden falls on the producers) versus the implication of a budget neutral, performance‐based EU Common Agricultural Policy ( CAP ) focusing on non‐ CO 2 emission ( N 2 O and CH 4 , measured in CO 2 eq ) reduction, especially in the livestock sector. The subsidy is budget neutral as financed via the current basic payment of the first pillar of the CAP . The policies are applied to the single farm level model FarmDyn to take into account heterogeneity between farms and regions and the macro model MAGNET to take into account market feedback and possible leakage effects. Farm level mitigation potentials and costs from FarmDyn are used to calibrate the EU27 national milk production Marginal Abatement Costs Curves ( MACCs ) in MAGNET . On the other hand, scenario‐specific changes in prices of agricultural inputs and output from MAGNET are used as input in FarmDyn , improving the consistency of the modelling framework. The results of the simulations conducted in this framework show clear conclusions. On the one hand, imposing a standard carbon tax on non‐ CO 2 emissions in the agricultural sector is the most effective method to achieve a greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emission reduction as the carbon tax can lead to significant reduction of total agricultural GHG emissions ( MAGNET ). Nevertheless, this result is connected to several trade‐offs, such as farm income losses in the short term ( FarmDyn ) and losses in agricultural production and employment (different by country in the EU27 ) in the somewhat longer term ( MAGNET ). On the other hand, subsidising the emission abatement costs allows for mitigating almost completely the negative trade‐offs while still allowing a substantial reduction of agricultural emissions. However, subsidies easily result in overcompensation and increased prices of inputs and technologies that mitigate emissions.

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
University of Bonn (DE), Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZ), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
European Commission, Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 49%
Agricultural Economics and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.