{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01913265306122449, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007653061224489796, 'mean_word_length': 5.5966386554621845, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Alternative Implementations of the Single Farm Payment Distributional Consequences for Austria

In 2003, the Common Agricultural Policy underwent a substantial reform. Direct payments that were linked to the production of certain crops and livestock were abolished. Alternatively, the Single Farm Payment was introduced in EU-15 Member States. These Member States were free to choose among several options on the details of the implementation. We investigate the distributional consequences of particular implementation choices in Austria by comparing the actual type 'partial decoupling historic model' with two alternative ones. Results show that – on average – these alternatives would slightly increase the net-returns of farms, but have substantial impacts on their distribution.