The controversy and the future of Common Agricultural Policy of European Union

Agriculture is a problematic area in every developed country. Free market economy that allows direct opposition of hoidenish products can often cause a surplus or shortage of certain(p) products, and quality changes. In order to date honest supply of food member states of the European Union decided to collaborate and transferred the authority over factory farm policy to European train. Common farming(a) Policy was set in 1961 and its aims were to improve end product and solve breathing problems in farming all over EU member states.The forward successes of cooperation with coal and steel, and the fact that most states had difficulties to produce certain goods logically conduct to deeper cooperation in agriculture, and to strong-armer. Today, CAP is regarded as the most developed of the European Unions policies and covers around 90% of all agricultural products (reader). But, also it is regarded as the most debatable and has been responsible for some contradict consequ ences on the industry, and it had to go under umpteen reforms. This essay will explain why CAP has been both celebrated and criticized. Also, it will include the challenges that will be put in earlier of it by the future enlargement of European Union.At the time CAP was made, national agricultures had all common problems. Although the different level of development, and different level on dependence on this industry between member states of EC, at that place were some immense troubles to be solved by Cap deficits of certain goods, inefficient production practices, poorness of people employed in agriculture, speedily dynamic prices, substantial variations in quality of products etc. The destinations of policy define in Maastricht Treaty, article 39(a) to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilization of the factors of production, in fact labor(b) thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture(c) to stabilize markets(d) to assure the availability of supplies(e) to ensure that supplies reach the consumers at bonnie prices. (TEU)Since its foundation CAP has improved the agriculture of Europe in a great sense, but critics would say that costs of the successes are considerably amply for all. Some of the goals were fulfilled with little negative consequences, while others were solved with disputed methods that became a huge burden for the budget and had many counter-effects.The changes in Europes agricultural structure and productivity since 1961 caused by CAP were enormous. Thanks to the investment in technology, there was a growth in productivity of farms, decrease in people employed in agriculture, rapid urbanization and therefore prosperity in other sectors of economy. Statistics show that the workforce employed in agriculture declined from 11.3% in 1973 to 9.4% in 1980 and alone 5.7% in the whole of the EU in 1992. (Hitiris, 190)Productivity growth was rapid, and we can say that the aim of CAP to restructure the farming to make it more efficient is being fulfilled. The growth of the competency of the labor can be noticed on the fact that In 1960 over 15 million people in the original sextuplet had worked on the land. In the mid-1970s the agricultural population of the enlarged EC was still 14 million, falling to 10 million by the mid-1980s (Urwin, 187)Second goal of CAP is a social mission to help the quality of life story of the people in agriculture. This went little against the economic productivity and caused many negative consequences on it, especially by huge costs.The interventions that were made were not only subsidizing the farmers, that is a huge burden for EU budget but schmaltzy manipulations with prices and setting of standards. These two were criticized by many liberal economists as normalisation brought prices up, and artificial price setting caused surpluses and deficits.