Adoption and potential of agri-environmental schemes in Europe: Cross-regional evidence from interviews with farmers

被引:10
作者
Bartkowski, Bartosz [1 ]
Beckmann, Michael [2 ]
Bednar, Marek [3 ]
Biffi, Sofia [4 ]
Domingo-Marimon, Cristina [5 ]
Mesaros, Minucer [6 ]
Schuessler, Charlotte
Sarapatka, Borivoj
Tarcak, Sonja [7 ]
Vaclavik, Tomas
Ziv, Guy [4 ]
Wittstock, Felix [8 ]
机构
[1] Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Dept Econ, UFZ, Leipzig, Germany
[2] Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Dept Computat Ecol, UFZ, Leipzig, Germany
[3] Palacky Univ Olomouc, Fac Sci, Dept Ecol & Environm Sci, Olomouc, Czech Republic
[4] Univ Leeds, Fac Environm, Sch Geog, Leeds, England
[5] CREAF, Barcelona, Spain
[6] Univ Novi Sad, Dept Geog Tourism & Hotel Management, Novi Sad, Serbia
[7] Univ Novi Sad, BioSense Inst, Novi Sad, Serbia
[8] Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Dept Environm Polit, UFZ, Leipzig, Germany
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
agri-environmental policy; agri-environmental schemes; conservation; farm interviews; farmer behaviour; CLIMATE-CHANGE; CONSERVATION; POLICY; PARTICIPATION; FARMLAND; LAND;
D O I
10.1002/pan3.10526
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
In Europe and elsewhere, agri-environmental schemes (AES) are designed to reduce agriculture's impacts on the environment. Designing effective schemes requires an understanding of the reasons that drive farmers' decisions whether to adopt AES.Currently, most insights come from individual case studies or structured surveys based on predefined questions. There is a paucity of studies that do not rely on rigid preconceptions about relevant behavioural factors while also offering a geographically and socio-culturally broad perspective that can address the cultural and institutional context-specificity of behavioural studies. Also, most studies focus on the adoption decision, while implementation decisions and their consequences for the ecological effectiveness of AES remain understudied.In this article, we present the results from semi-structured farmer interviews conducted in five agricultural landscapes across Europe. The results are used to uncover reasons for AES adoption as well as the implications of AES implementation decisions for their ecological effectiveness.The main reason for AES adoption that was common across case study regions is the interplay of opportunity costs and payment levels, which has negative implications for the ecological effectiveness of AES as farmers prioritized marginal land or adopted non-additional AES. Among reasons that vary across regions, tenure relations and the role of ecological reasoning stand out.We find that AES are unlikely to trigger broader shifts towards sustainable management but there is some potential for improvement, mainly by increasing the flexibility, spatial targeting and ecological ambition of the schemes.
引用
收藏
页码:1610 / 1621
页数:12
相关论文
共 51 条
  • [21] Framing agricultural policy through the EC's strategies on CAP reforms (1992-2017)
    Erjavec, Karmen
    Erjavec, Emil
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD ECONOMICS, 2021, 9 (01)
  • [22] European Union, 2013, REG EU 1305 2013 EUR
  • [23] The use of agri-environmental measures to address environmental pressures in Germany: Spatial mismatches and options for improvement
    Frueh-Mueller, Andrea
    Bach, Martin
    Breuer, Lutz
    Hotes, Stefan
    Koellner, Thomas
    Krippes, Christian
    Wolters, Volkmar
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2019, 84 : 347 - 362
  • [24] Gosal A., 2020, Exploring ecosystem markets for the delivery of public goods in the UK
  • [25] Farmers' action space to adopt sustainable practices: a study of arable farming in Saxony
    Guetschow, Malin
    Bartkowski, Bartosz
    Felipe-Lucia, Maria R.
    [J]. REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE, 2021, 21 (04)
  • [26] Land reform and land fragmentation in Central and Eastern Europe
    Hartvigsen, Morten
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2014, 36 : 330 - 341
  • [27] Paying for Environmental Results is WTO Compliant
    Hasund, Knut Per
    Johansson, Maria
    [J]. EUROCHOICES, 2016, 15 (03) : 33 - 38
  • [28] Time to look for evidence: Results-based approach to biodiversity conservation on farmland in Europe
    Herzon, I.
    Birge, T.
    Allen, B.
    Povellato, A.
    Vanni, F.
    Hart, K.
    Radley, G.
    Tucker, G.
    Keenleyside, C.
    Oppermann, R.
    Underwood, E.
    Poux, X.
    Beaufoy, G.
    Prazan, J.
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2018, 71 : 347 - 354
  • [29] UK after Brexit - a Massive Field Experiment for CAP Reform?Das Vereinigte Konigreich nach dem Brexit - ein gigantischer Feldversuch fur die GAP-Reform?
    Hill, Berkeley
    [J]. EUROCHOICES, 2021, 20 (01) : 62 - 66
  • [30] Climate impacts on global agriculture emerge earlier in new generation of climate and crop models
    Jagermeyr, Jonas
    Mueller, Christoph
    Ruane, Alex C.
    Elliott, Joshua
    Balkovic, Juraj
    Castillo, Oscar
    Faye, Babacar
    Foster, Ian
    Folberth, Christian
    Franke, James A.
    Fuchs, Kathrin
    Guarin, Jose R.
    Heinke, Jens
    Hoogenboom, Gerrit
    Iizumi, Toshichika
    Jain, Atul K.
    Kelly, David
    Khabarov, Nikolay
    Lange, Stefan
    Lin, Tzu-Shun
    Liu, Wenfeng
    Mialyk, Oleksandr
    Minoli, Sara
    Moyer, Elisabeth J.
    Okada, Masashi
    Phillips, Meridel
    Porter, Cheryl
    Rabin, Sam S.
    Scheer, Clemens
    Schneider, Julia M.
    Schyns, Joep F.
    Skalsky, Rastislav
    Smerald, Andrew
    Stella, Tommaso
    Stephens, Haynes
    Webber, Heidi
    Zabel, Florian
    Rosenzweig, Cynthia
    [J]. NATURE FOOD, 2021, 2 (11): : 875 - +