Ten years after: Diffusion, criticism and potential improvements in the use of FADN for Rural Development assessment in Italy

Titolo Rivista Economia agro-alimentare
Autori/Curatori Roberto Cagliero, Andrea Arzeni, Federica Cisilino, Alessandro Montelelone, Patrizia Borsotto
Anno di pubblicazione 2022 Fascicolo 2021/3 Lingua Inglese
Numero pagine 0 P. 1-24 Dimensione file 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/ecag2021oa12769
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Vedi l'articolo Scarica l'articolo open access

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

This article aims to contribute to the debate about the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN), on how to make it more usable, useful and reliable, both for research users and practitioners when studying policy assessment. Ten years ago, the Italian National Rural Network published a highly relevant report about FADN data use for Rural Development policy evaluation, providing a wide range of examples of its application. The report had the merit of providing a comprehensive and systematic overview of FADN uses for evaluation for the first time and not only for impact assessment.From this experience, this paper examines how the different Managing Authorities in Italy have used FADN data for the evaluation of the current 2014-20 Rural Development Programmes: how actually the database has been used in the Annual Implementation Reports, with a focus on indicators for competitiveness assessment. The paper highlights some recommendations, considering the next programming period and the application of the so-called New Delivery Model.

Keywords:; FADN; Evaluation; CMEF; Rural Development

  1. Abitabile, C. & Scardera, A. (Ed.) (2008). La rete contabile agricola nazionale RICA – da rete di assistenza tecnica a fonte statistica. Rome: INEA, I metodi RICA.
  2. AIR (2019). Relazione annuale di attuazione 2019, Italian Regions.
  3. Arzeni, A., Ascione, E., Borsotto, P., Carta, V., Castellotti, T. & Vagnozzi, A. (2021). Analysis of farms characteristics related to innovation needs: a proposal for supporting the public decision-making process. Land Use Policy, 100, 104892, DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104892.
  4. Borsotto, P. (2019). Preliminary analysis of the needs of BC in terms of evaluation of the policies and identification of possible use of the FADN. Twining MK 13 IPA “Finalization of the FADN”. Skopije: Twinning Project.
  5. Cagliero, R. & Cristiano, S. (Ed.) (2013). La politica di sviluppo rurale post 2013. Monitorare e valutare i programmi di sviluppo rurale: metodi e strumenti. Rome: INEA, Studi e Ricerche.
  6. Cagliero, R., Camaioni, B., D’Angelo, L., Gloria, R. & Licciardo, F. (2020). Il quadro degli indicatori nel contesto di riforma della PAC post-2020. Rete Rurale Nazionale 2014-2020. Rome: MIPAAF.
  7. Cagliero, R., Cisilino, F. & Scardera, A. (2011). Evaluating Rural Development Programmes Using fadn Data. Rete Rurale Nazionale 207-2013. Rome: MIPAAF.
  8. Cagliero, R., Cristiano, S., Giampaolo, A., Povellato, A. & Scardera, A. (2019). Verso un nuovo modello di PAC: fabbisogni informativi e ruolo della RICA. Agriregionieuropa, 15(56), 71-76.
  9. Cagliero, R., Iacono, R., Licciardo, F. Prandi, T. & Rossi, N. (2018). La montagna e le zone svantaggiate nei Programmi di Sviluppo Rurale: una valutazione delle indennità compensative attraverso la rica . Economia agro-alimentare, 3, 479-501, DOI: 10.3280/ECAG2018-003011.
  10. Cagliero, R., Legini, M. & Licciardo, F. (2021). Evaluating the New Common Agricultural Policy: Improving the Rules. EuroChoices, July, 01-7, DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12315.
  11. Cisilino, F., Bodini, A. & Zanoli, A. (2019). Rural development programs’ impact on environment: An ex-post evaluation of organic farming. Land Use Policy, 85, 454-462, DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.016.
  12. Cisilino, F., Zanoli, A. & Bodini, A. (2013). La RICA per il controfattuale: un’applicazione dello Statistical Matching. Roma: INEA, Sviluppo Rurale.
  13. Cristiano, S. & Proietti, P. (2019). Evaluating the effects of interactive innovations at farm level: the potential of FADN. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 25(2), 103-116, DOI: 10.1080/1389224X.2019.1583812.
  14. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Metis, WIFO, Aeidl (2014). Investment support under Rural Development Policy. Final Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the EU.
  15. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (2017). Technical Handbook on the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework of The Common Agricultural Policy 2014-2020. Brussels: European Commission.
  16. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit E.4 (2016). Guidelines. Assessment of RDP results: How to prepare for reporting on evaluation in 2017. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  17. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (2010). Working paper on Approaches for assessing the impacts of the Rural Development Programmes in the context of multiple intervening factors. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  18. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit C.4 (2021a). Assessing the contribution of RDPs to a competitive and viable agricultural sector. Good Practice Workshop 09-10 December 2020. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  19. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit C.4 (2021b). Working Document ‘Best use of fadn for the assessment of RDP effects on fostering the competitiveness in agriculture – Working Package 3 ‘Assessment of RDP effects on fostering the competitiveness of agriculture’ - Thematic Working Group no 8 ‘Ex post evaluation of RDPs 2014-2020: Learning from practice’. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  20. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit C.4 (2018a). Guidelines. Assessing RDP achievements and impacts in 2019. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  21. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit C.4 (2018b). Approaches to assess socio-economic and sector related RDP impacts in 2019. Report of Good Practice Workshop Warsaw 24-25 October 2018. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  22. European Commission – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit C.4 (2020). Data management for the assessment of RDP effects. Report of the Good Practice Workshop 13-14 May 2020. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development. Brussels: European Commission, European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development.
  23. European Evaluation Helpdesk for Rural Development (2019). Interactive CAP Indicator Dashboards: transparency and growth for a more sustainable tomorrow. Rural Evaluation news, n. 12, April 2019, 1-6.
  24. INEA (2003). L’archivio “RICA per Valutazione”: procedura di controllo delle informazioni rica a scopo di valutazione delle politiche di sviluppo rurale. Rome: INEA.
  25. INEA (2014). L’agricoltura biologica nello sviluppo rurale e l’uso della RICA per il calcolo dei pagamenti delle aziende biologiche. Rete Rurale Nazionale 2007-2013. Rome: MIPAAF.
  26. Mantino, F. (2008). Lo sviluppo rurale in Europa. Politiche, istituzioni e attori locali dagli anni ’70 ad oggi. Milano: Edagricole - Il Sole24ORE.
  27. Michalek, J. (2012). Counterfactual Impact Evaluation of EU Rural Development Programmes – Propensity Score Matching Methodology Applied to Selected EU Member States. Volume 1: A Micro-level Approach. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  28. NUVAL (2016). Rapporto di valutazione ex post. Programma di Sviluppo Rurale della Regione Piemonte 2007-2013. Torino: Regione Piemonte.
  29. Poppe K., & Vrolijk H. (Ed.) (2016). Farm sustainability data for better policy evaluation with FADN. Wageningen University and Research. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
  30. Poppe, K., & Vrolijk, H. (2018). Microdata: a critical source for policy evaluation. Eurochoices, 17(1), April, 28-35, DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12169.
  31. Scardera, A. (2008). Le statistiche aziendali ai fini della valutazione delle politiche. In Bagarani, M. (Ed.). Letture dello Sviluppo Rurale (pp. 167-180). Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  32. Seroglia, G. & Trione, S. (2002). L’equo indennizzo alle imprese agricole nelle zone montane e svantaggiate. Il caso della Valle d’Aosta. Rome: INEA, Analisi Regionali.
  33. Sinabell, F., & Streicher, G. (2004). Programme evaluation with micro-data: the use of FADN data to evaluate effects on the market situation of programme participants. The 87th EAAE-Seminar. Assessing rural development of the CAP, Vienna, Austria, April 21-23 (1-13).
  34. Vrolijk, H., & Poppe, K. (2021). Cost of Extending the Farm Accountancy Data Network to the Farm Sustainability Data Network: Empirical Evidence. Sustainability, 13, 8181, DOI: 10.3390/su13158181.

  • Farming of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in Italy: Structural Features and Economic Results Dario Macaluso, Francesco Licciardo, Katya Carbone, in Agriculture /2024 pp.151
    DOI: 10.3390/agriculture14010151
  • Examining disparities in common agriculture policy direct payments among farming systems: evidence from Portugal Isabel Dinis, in Agricultural and Food Economics 7/2024
    DOI: 10.1186/s40100-024-00299-6

Roberto Cagliero, Andrea Arzeni, Federica Cisilino, Alessandro Montelelone, Patrizia Borsotto, Ten years after: Diffusion, criticism and potential improvements in the use of FADN for Rural Development assessment in Italy in "Economia agro-alimentare" 3/2021, pp 1-24, DOI: 10.3280/ecag2021oa12769