Rationale of usePrevious critiques of Slovenian agricultural policies highlighted its inefficacy and inefficiency due to a sprawling objective scope. Thus, to bolster the prioritisation process, the European Commission advocated for a robust methodology backed by expert judgment.
FunctioningThe report employs a multifaceted criterion system, amalgamating survey findings, evaluation report outcomes, and other elements into a cohesive prioritisation mechanism. Each criterion possesses its distinct scoring system, culminating in a comprehensive rank-based prioritisation for the specific objectives of CAP. Each criterion was scored from 1 to 5 (synergies were scored from -1 to 5, as there may be conflicting needs), and the sum of these scores was used to rank the needs in order of importance for each of the nine specific objectives of CAP. In the final prioritisation process, these rankings were converted into the scoring system mentioned above.
Types of outputsThe report's rankings of the importance of needs were used as one of the criteria in the overarching methodology for prioritising needs. These rankings are the only economics-based criterion in this context and account for about a quarter of the total score for needs prioritisation.
Relevant CAP objectiveAll
Tool nameNeeds Priorisation Approach
CategoryPolicy choices supporting tools
SubcategoryExpert judgement-based approaches
Author or ownerAuthor: Auditing company Deloitte consulting LLC in cooperation with the Agricultural Institute of Slovenia
CSP Design: Needs Assessment
We would like to hear your feedback on the tools we are identifying in the CAP Strategic Plans.