Mixing Public and Private Agri-Environment Schemes: Effects on Farmers Participation in Quebec, Canada

被引:5
作者
Zaga-Mendez, Alejandra [1 ]
Kolinjivadi, Vijay [1 ]
Bissonnette, Jean-Francois [2 ]
Dupras, Jerome [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Quebec Outaouais, Inst Temperate Forest Sci, Gatineau, PQ, Canada
[2] Univ Laval, Geog Dept, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE COMMONS | 2020年 / 14卷 / 01期
关键词
Agri-environmental schemes; institutional analysis; payments for ecosystem services; Institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PES; INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS; DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK; POLITICAL-ECONOMY; PAYMENTS; LANDSCAPE; GRAMMAR; US;
D O I
10.5334/ijc.1002
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Incentive-based mechanisms, such as payments for ecosystem services (PES) are increasingly being employed to encourage adoption of biodiversity conservation practices in agriculture. Farmers' participation in a PES depends - amongst other factors - on their interactions with previous programs and schemes. This research analyses how the institutional characteristics and interactions of incentive-based mechanisms shape the type of farmers' participation and the achievement of desired socio-ecological outcomes. This research focusses on the institutional frameworks of two programs in the Province of Quebec, Canada: the 'Prime-Vert' Program (public agri-environment scheme) and the 'Alternative Land Use Services' (ALUS) initiative (a privately-funded "PES" scheme). The institutional prescriptions of these two programs were examined and compared through the lenses of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. We reveal the impact of the institutional framework on farmers' participation by assessing the degree of farmers' engagement in the implementation and management of schemes. Our results showed a strong dependence of the private PES on the public scheme, rendering both programs ultimately managed under the remit of the provincial government. While the complementarity of both programs diversifies sources of funding for farmers, the presence of rigid rules governing these incentives tend to treat farmers as passive beneficiaries of a network of centralized subsidies which they have little control over. This compromises farmers' autonomy as the rigidity of rules impedes any attempt to achieve active participation in the design and implementation of agri-environmental practices.
引用
收藏
页码:296 / 312
页数:17
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Embedding built environments in social-ecological systems: resilience-based design principles
    Anderies, John M.
    [J]. BUILDING RESEARCH AND INFORMATION, 2014, 42 (02) : 130 - 142
  • [2] Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: a conceptual framework
    Barnaud, Cecile
    Corbera, Esteve
    Muradian, Roldan
    Salliou, Nicolas
    Sirami, Clelia
    Vialatte, Aude
    Choisis, Jean-Philippe
    Dendoncker, Nicolas
    Mathevet, Raphael
    Moreau, Clemence
    Reyes-Garcia, Victoria
    Boada, Marti
    Deconchat, Marc
    Cibien, Catherine
    Garnier, Stephan
    Maneja, Roser
    Antona, Martine
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2018, 23 (01):
  • [3] Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments
    Barton, David N.
    Benavides, Karla
    Chacon-Cascante, Adriana
    Le Coq, Jean-Francois
    Quiros, Miriam Miranda
    Porras, Ina
    Primmer, Eeva
    Ring, Irene
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE, 2017, 27 (05) : 404 - 421
  • [4] A Systematic Approach to Institutional Analysis: Applying Crawford and Ostrom's Grammar
    Basurto, Xavier
    Kingsley, Gordon
    McQueen, Kelly
    Smith, Mshadoni
    Weible, Christopher M.
    [J]. POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 2010, 63 (03) : 523 - 537
  • [5] Deciding how to decide on agri-environmental schemes: the political economy of subsidiarity, decentralisation and participation in the European Union
    Beckmann, Volker
    Eggers, Joerg
    Mettepenningen, Evy
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2009, 52 (05) : 689 - 716
  • [6] Integrating multiple perspectives on payments for ecosystem services through a social-ecological systems framework
    Bennett, Drew E.
    Gosnell, Hannah
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2015, 116 : 172 - 181
  • [7] Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation
    Carter, David P.
    Weible, Christopher M.
    Siddiki, Saba N.
    Basurto, Xavier
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL POLITICS, 2016, 28 (01) : 159 - 185
  • [8] Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential-For Transformation Towards Sustainability
    Chan, Kai M. A.
    Anderson, Emily
    Chapman, Mollie
    Jespersen, Kristjan
    Olmsted, Paige
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2017, 140 : 110 - 122
  • [9] Understanding process, power, and meaning in adaptive governance: a critical institutional reading
    Cleaver, Frances
    Whaley, Luke
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2018, 23 (02):
  • [10] Cooke B.U. Kothari., 2001, PARTICIPATION NEW TY