Agri-Environmental Policy: Understanding the Role of Regional Administration

Abstract

Abstract With regard to agri-environmental schemes (AES) under Regulation (EC) 1257/99, we suggest thattheir ineffectiveness, inefficiency, and divers uptake is inherent to the way they are institutionalised inthe European CAP framework. Based on experiences of the GRANO research project that initiatedtwo Agri-Environmental Forums in Brandenburg (Germany) to integrate local actors directly into de-signing and implementing local AES we argue that the process of designing AES can beconceptualised as a complex negotiation process at Laender level. The related institutional settingsshape possible outcomes and scheme designs. With only “passive support” for decentralised and par-ticipatory approaches yet compulsory complex bureaucratic procedures on part of the EU, there are noincentives for Laender administrations to actively support those approaches. Keywords: agri-environmental policy, subsidiarity principle, Germany; JEL classification : H11; H77; Q18 1 Introduction The reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 1992, the introduction of the Agenda 2000,and also the recently presented Mid-Term Review exemplify a new trend in agricultural policy in theEuropean Union (EU) towards an agri-environmental policy and a policy for rural development.Among other things, agri-environmental schemes (AES) have been developed to remunerate environ-mental services provided by farmers within the framework of EU regulations, such as Regulation (EC)1257/99. In recent years, agricultural economists and other rural researchers have paid a lot of atten-tion to the new policy area mostly in the context of ongoing policy evaluations (compare, e.g., Bau-doux, 2001; Brouwer and Lowe, 2002; Buller et al., 2000; Hagedorn, 2002; Marggraf, 2003; Oster-burg and Nieberg, 2001). Additionally, AES have been subject to evaluation by EU organisations(e.g., Court of Auditors 2000) and policy actors (Dwyer et al., 2002). Although the general trajectoryof shifting policy instruments has been welcomed by most academics the detailed analysis of AES hasgiven room for quite substantial criticism.The most striking observation has been the rather divers uptake of the opportunities offered in theformer Regulation (EEC) 2078/92 as well as in the current Rural Development Regulation (EC)1257/99. This can be said for the relative share of agri-environmental spending as well as for the de-sign of AES. Since nation states seem to run rather different strategies towards agri-environmentalissues the divers uptake cannot solely be explained by different natural conditions and farm structures.In Germany, due to the fact that the