Participation In Agri-environmental Schemes Research Articles

Does participation in agri-environmental schemes increase eco-efficiency?

The literature on the effectiveness of Agri-Environmental Schemes focuses mainly on the environmental effects; only a few studies have focused on economic aspects. The number of papers that address ecological and economic outcomes simultaneously is even more limited. In this paper, we apply the concept of eco-efficiency to integrate these two factors. The aim of the paper is to analyze the impact of participation in the agri-environmental scheme of Hungarian field crop farmers in terms of eco-efficiency. To make unbiased and consistent comparisons we use advances from aggregation and bootstrap theory in Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) context. The results indicate that there exists a significant potential for enhancing eco-efficiency in Hungarian crop farms. Furthermore, our results reveal that, in terms of eco-efficiency, perceived as the relationship of farm income to pesticide, fertilizers and energy use, no significant differences exist between participating and non-participating farmers. The results are robust to different methods. Our results pose questions about the efficacy of the Agri-Environmental Scheme.

Influencing factors of farmers' land transfer, subjective well-being, and participation in agri-environment schemes in environmentally fragile areas of China.

One of the purposes of agri-environment schemes (AESs) is to persuade farmers to make good environmental contributions. Understanding the determinants of farmer behavior and the decisions they make regarding AESs is crucial because it helps policymakers create schemes with a broader reach and a higher likelihood of achieving environmental goals. This paper aims to explore the impacts of land transfer, farmers' subjective well-being, and participation in AESs in environmentally fragile areas of China by using data of 6840 sampled farmers obtained from China Family Panel Studies (CFPS). A relatively novel approach of ordinary least square (OLS), the ordered probit model approach, and the mediation effect model is used to assess the association between the land transfer mechanism, subjective well-being, and participation in AESs. The model outcomes indicate that land transfer has a considerable influence on AES involvement and that it can boost farmers' subjective well-being. The findings of our study also indicate that the marginal effect of land transfer on the subjective well-being of nonpoor households is greater than that of poor households, and the impact degree of land transfer on the subjective well-being of farmers reveals a weakening trend from east to west regions. Local conditions should be taken as guidance to effectively coordinate the regional resource allocation.

Increasing the adoption intensity of sustainable agricultural practices in Europe: Farm and practice level insights

Understanding what influences the adoption of multiple sustainable farming practices, a concept we call adoption intensity, is critical to the sustainable development of our food system. Drawing on a survey of European farmers, and using structural equation modelling, we found dispositional influences important for adoption intensity at the farm-level but not as important for adoption intensity across all aspects of farm management. Productivity objectives were negatively associated with adoption intensity, but value chain support was positively associated, indicating the important role of the supply chain at the farm level. Participation in agri-environment schemes was not associated with farm-level adoption intensity but did have a positive association with adoption intensity in three farm management categories. These results have important implications for sustainable agricultural policy development and highlight the need to consider different incentives based on the scale of the change to be achieved.

Does agri-environment scheme participation in England increase pollinator populations and crop pollination services?

Agri-environment schemes are programmes where landholders enter into voluntary agreements (typically with governments) to manage agricultural land for environmental protection and nature conservation objectives. Previous work at local scale has shown that these features can provide additional floral and nesting resources to support wild pollinators, which may indirectly increase floral visitation to nearby crops. However, the effect of entire schemes on this important ecosystem service has never previously been studied at national scale. Focusing on four wild pollinator guilds (ground-nesting bumblebees, tree-nesting bumblebees, ground-nesting solitary bees, and cavity-nesting solitary bees), we used a state-of-the-art, process-based spatial model to examine the relationship between participation in agri-environment schemes across England during 2016 and the predicted abundances of these guilds and their visitation rates to four pollinator dependent crops (oilseed rape, field beans, orchard fruit and strawberries). Our modelling predicts that significant increases in national populations of ground-nesting bumblebees and ground-nesting solitary bees have occurred in response to the schemes. Lack of significant population increases for other guilds likely reflects specialist nesting resource requirements not well-catered for in schemes. We do not predict statistically significant increases in visitation to pollinator-dependent crops at national level as a result of scheme interventions but do predict some localised areas of significant increase in bumblebee visitation to crops flowering in late spring. Lack of any significant change in visitation to crops which flower outside this season is likely due to a combination of low provision of nesting resource relative to floral resource by scheme interventions and low overall participation in more intensively farmed landscapes. We recommend future schemes place greater importance on nesting resource provision alongside floral resource provision, better cater for the needs of specialised species and promote more contiguous patches of semi-natural habitat to better support solitary bee visitation.

Combining the best of two methodological worlds? Integrating Q methodology-based farmer archetypes in a quantitative model of agri-environmental scheme uptake

Increasing farmers’ acceptance and adoption of environmentally beneficial farming practices is essential for mitigating negative impacts of agriculture. To support adoption through policy, it is necessary to understand which types of farms or farmers do or do not (yet) apply such practices. However, farmers are not a homogeneous group and their behavior is subject to a complex array of structural, socioeconomic, and socio-psychological influences. Reducing this complexity, farmer typologies or archetypes are useful tools for understanding differing motivations for the uptake of sustainable farming practices. Previous investigations of the role of farmer archetypes in the adoption of such practices rely on either purely qualitative or purely quantitative methods in data collection, typology creation, and hypothesis testing. Our study combines both approaches by classifying survey respondents into farmer types based on a previous Q methodological study. We then use these types in a two-part regression model that aims to explain participation in agri-environmental schemes (AES) and the level of scheme participation. To control for farm structural factors, we additionally link our questionnaire data to secondary data from the farm accountancy data network. Results indicate that in Austria, AES are attractive to all types of farmers, but the level of participation (AES income per hectare) in these schemes differs between archetypes: Profitability-oriented farmers participate less, and nature-oriented farmers participate more than other types. This suggests that monetary compensations for sustainable farming practices are not perceived as sufficient by certain groups of farmers, and policy makers need to consider additional kinds of incentives.

Acceptance of sustainability standards by farmers - empirical evidence from Germany

We use a discrete choice experiment to investigate the willingness-to-accept a sustainability standard by German farmers. We also evaluate how attributes in standard design increase acceptance. The estimation of a latent class logit model results in two groups of farmers differentiated with respect to attitude, risk perception, age, education and previous participation in agri-environmental schemes (AES). However, all respondents prefer to use the EU's Integrated Administration and Control System based data and a standard linked to AES. These findings suggest valuable insights for the design or revision of sustainability standards as part of the implementation of the European CAP in line with the European Union's CAP proposal for 2021–2027.

Impact of farmer self-identity and attitudes on participation in agri-environment schemes

Influencing farmers to make positive contributions to the environment is one of the goals of agri-environment schemes (AESs). Understanding the drivers of farmer behaviour and the choices they make with regards to AESs is important as this aids policy makers in creating schemes that have a wider scope and are more likely to achieve environmental goals. Past studies have identified the importance of farmer self-identity and attitudes in decisions made on farms. Little emphasis has been put on modelling the relationship between self-identity and attitudes towards schemes and the resulting impact on participation in voluntary AESs. Using Ireland as a case-study, this paper employs a survey of 1000 farms to look at participation in AESs through the lens of farmer perceived self-identity and their attitudes towards schemes. A relatively novel approach of combining factor analysis, to generate a self-identity typology, with an AES participation regression model is implemented. The model results suggest that self-identity and attitudes have a significant impact on AES participation. Neighbouring farmers’ viewpoints also have a significant and positive impact on the participation decision made by farmers.

Participation in agri-environmental schemes: A contingent valuation study of farmers in Ireland

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are an important part of agricultural policy within Europe. They seek to achieve important goals with regards to biodiversity and the protection of natural resources while also helping to maintain culturally important landscapes and agricultural practices. Participation rates have been an important area of research into assessing the success of AES. Within Ireland and more broadly across Europe, systematic non-participation in AES has been observed. Certain farm and farmer types have been found more likely to participate. In this paper a contingent valuation exercise is conducted that assesses how AES payment levels impact on the participation decision of farmers. A bivariate probit with sample selection is utilised to account for farmers who are unwilling to participate regardless of payment levels. This allows for a more accurate estimation of farmer willingness-to-accept to participate in the hypothetical AES presented. It also offers insight into the characteristics of farmers who are unlikely to ever participate in these schemes. From the results it appears a significant proportion (30%) of farmers are unlikely to ever participate in AES, with the remaining open to participation depending on the compensation offered. It is argued that increased compensation levels may increase participation rates among some farmers who to date have been unlikely to participate.

Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area

Agri-environmental schemes have become an integral tool of land use management policies in ecologically valuable river valleys, that are commonly recognized as very important bird habitats. When high adoption of extensive agricultural practices is not only a political goal, but also a necessary condition for conservation of vulnerable ecosystems, understanding of farmers’ preferences is utterly important. Therefore, we use the case of Biebrza Marshes – a wetland complex and one of the largest wildlife refuges in Europe, which is located in northeastern Poland – and employ stated preference methods to investigate farmers’ preferences for adopting several agricultural practices, such as precision fertilization, crop diversification, catch crops, peatland protection, extensive use of meadows, and the reduction of livestock stocking density. Farmers’ willingness to participate in selected practices is explained using characteristics of farmers and their farms, subjectively and objectively measured farmers’ environmental knowledge, as well as by experimentally controlled information treatments about environmental benefits of agri-environmental contracts. The results provide new insights into the sources of farmers’ preference heterogeneity and show how different motivations relate to participation in agri-environmental schemes. Based on the results and consultations with local stakeholders, we make recommendations for a more efficient design and targeting of land use management instruments, including future agri-environmental schemes.

Understanding the Spatial Agglomeration of Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes: The Case of the Tuscany Region

Agri-environmental schemes (AESs) constitute one of the main agricultural policy instruments that address environmental objectives in the Common Agricultural Policy. However, in spite of a 20-year application window and large budgetary shares allocated by EU member states, several studies demonstrate lower-than-expected environmental impacts. The reasons for poor environmental outcomes are the lack of targeting, low participation rates, spatial heterogeneity, and information asymmetry between farmers and public administrators. This study comprehensively analyses the determinants of AES adoption while highlighting patterns of the spatial agglomeration of participation in organic and integrated production. For this, we combine the results of farm-level adoption analysis with a spatial analysis of the participation rate. The results show that both micro- and meso-level characteristics strongly impact AES participation. In fact, farm and household structure, quality of extension services, and territorial conditions all significantly affect AES adoption.

Self-initiated nature conservation by farmers: an analysis of Dutch farming

ABSTRACTIn Europe, the active contribution of farmers to nature conservation is mainly voluntary. Whereas participation in agri-environmental schemes (AES) has been studied in detail, less is known about self-initiated nature conservation. Given the alarming decline in species diversity and abundance in agricultural landscapes, it is important to explore this form of conservation in more detail. In this paper we report on the results of a survey of Dutch dairy and arable farmers. We conclude that a large majority of farmers conduct self-initiated conservation activities on their farmyards and fields with varying ecological impacts and impacts on farming system. Helping birds was the most often mentioned activity. Farm size, on-farm side activities (in dairy farming), organic farming, the quality of the surrounding area and the absence of external constraints have a positive effect on the number of activities. Intensity has a negative effect on both the number of activities and on the probability that farmers conduct activities with substantial ecological impacts. There is no unambiguous evidence of a ‘crowding-out effect’ due to participation in AES. More research in this area can help contributing to a maximal exploitation of the conservation potential by farmers and to creating synergies with agri-environmental policies.

Motivation Crowding and Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes – The Case of the Austrian Öpul-Programme in Vineyards

Abstract Viticulture has an effect on several ecosystem services, while it also is a sector critically affected by diverse ecological risks. Payments for agri-environmental services address several of these risks. Based on 77 interviews, we compare the motivational patterns of vintners participating and non-participating in the Austrian agri-environmental scheme ÖPUL to analyse mechanisms of motivation crowding. We identified three types of vintners that are motivated not only by “financial incentives” but also by a complex combination of different intersecting socio-psychological mechanisms – such as frame shifting by social learning or peer recognition reinforcing or control aversion and frustration with the administrative burden hindering the delivery of environmental services. More research is needed to understand how different strategies of risk governance, such as legal standards, information, capacity building, incentives and reflective discourse might be best combined to address different groups of farmers.

Effects of awareness on farmers’ compliance with diffuse pollution mitigation measures: A conditional process modelling

Despite several decades of research and financial commitment, diffuse water pollution remains a major problem threatening the health and resilience of social-ecological systems. New approaches to tackle diffuse pollution emphasise awareness raising and provision of advice with the aim of triggering behavioural change. However, empirical evidence on the effectiveness of this approach remains scarce and mixed, with most studies relying on smaller datasets and case studies. Using one of the largest datasets (N = 1,995) with this information, this study seeks to establish quantitatively the relationship between farmers’ stated awareness of diffuse pollution mitigation measures and their compliance with them, through the analysis of Scotland’s pioneer advice-driven approach. Results from a conditional process modelling suggest awareness might not directly determine compliance but influences it indirectly through the mediating effect of other environmental management practices (in this study reflected in participation in agri-environmental schemes). This mediated relationship appears to be contingent on farm type and location. This would indicate that while public efforts in awareness creation is important, awareness alone is not sufficient to improve compliance; farmers may need to consistently engage in environmental management practices to develop a deeper understanding of the problem and action strategies. In this context, agri-environmental schemes appear to provide an opportunity for the creation of tacit knowledge and understanding of diffuse pollution mitigation measures through experiential learning which may also lead to the creation of new values.

Farmer participation in agri-environmental schemes: Regionalisation and the role of bridging social capital

European agri-environmental schemes are being criticised for reinforcing rather than negating an opposition between agricultural production and environmental production, and for assuming instead of securing a public willingness to pay for agri-environmental change. This paper explores if a regionalisation of agri-environmental governance may contribute to overcome these criticisms. The paper empirically explores three regionalised agri-environmental schemes from Flanders, Belgium, with the use of 40 qualitative interviews with farmers and other relevant stakeholders. Building on the Bourdieusian theory of capital and the conceptual distinction between bonding and bridging social capital, the paper analyses whether and why the regionalised arrangements incited farmers to integrate environmental production in their farm management to meet other regional stakeholders’ demands for agri-environmental change. In doing so, the paper particularly focuses on the role of bridging social capital in fostering farmer participation in agri-environmental governance, which is a topic that—despite a growing scholarly recognition of the importance of social capital in mediating farmers’ environmental behaviour—has to date received scant conceptual and empirical attention. The paper reveals that farmers principally participated in the regionalised agri-environmental schemes to enhance the long-term viability of their agricultural businesses by building up more cooperative and appreciative, bridging social ties with other regional stakeholders. Notably, such participation is only likely to be substantive and lead to long-term, pro-environmental behaviour change of farmers, if farmers actually succeed in building up bridging social capital by receiving other regional stakeholders’ appreciation for their agri-environmental work. The paper ends with discussing the implications of these findings for the future design and implementation of socially and ecologically robust agri-environmental schemes.

Patterns of agri-environmental scheme participation in Europe: Indicative trends from selected case studies

This paper investigates the personal and property characteristics of landowners who use EU Rural Development agri-environmental schemes (AES), as well as their motives for participation or non-participation in such schemes. The study is based on a questionnaire survey with landowners, in selected study areas in the Netherlands, Denmark, Austria, Italy and Greece. Our principal findings show that AES tend to attract more the owners of larger farms, who are frequently full-time, younger, post-primary school educated and agriculturally-trained farmers. The latter findings are contingent on local geographical particularities and on subjective factors, farmers' individualities, different rural cultures, landscape types, EU and national policies and special needs of the study areas—all areas where agricultural production is increasingly marginalized, for different reasons. Subsidy scheme participation motives did not seem to be strictly economic; they also regarded personal satisfaction. They are all together generally appeared to be place specific, since the respondents from peri-urban Northern European areas were more motivated to participate in AES than respondents from Central and Southern European areas with marginal potential for agriculture. Motives for non-participation were also found to be dependent on the level of farming engagement and on case-area landscape types.

Agri-environmental diversification: Linking environmental, forestry and renewable energy engagement on Scottish farms

In this paper we broaden the debate on agri-environmental scheme participation to include farm woodland expansion and renewable energy production, developing a conceptualisation of ‘agri-environmental diversification’. Utilising structural equation modelling, we assess a telephone survey of 2416 Scottish farmers, undertaken in 2013. Findings demonstrate the path dependencies of farming participants, with those already engaged in each of these activities the most likely to plan to be involved in future. Similar factors have influenced the uptake of all three activities since 2005, and intention to increase involvement by 2020. Farmers who are: younger, better educated, information-seeking, certified as organic, receive subsidies, have non-farming income and plan to continue farming in the medium term, are more likely to plan for future engagement in the three activities. Environmental attitudes are also important, but a stronger relationship was found between observation of environmental gains from agri-environmental schemes and the three forms of agri-environmental diversification, suggesting that scheme involvement enables farmers to learn to produce, recognise and value environmental goods. We argue that when assessed within the broader perspective of agri-environmental diversification, agri-environmental scheme participation may represent an initial step on a farming trajectory that involves multiple forms of agri-environmental engagement.

The Impact of Agri-environmental Schemes on Farm Performance in Five E.U. Member States: A DID-Matching Approach

The agri-environmental schemes (AESs) of the European Union employ the highest share of the public budget allocated to rural development programs. Our study applies a difference-indifferences propensity score matching estimator to perform a comparative analysis of the effects of these schemes on farmers’ performance across five E.U. member states. The effects of the AESs adoption largely depend on the share of the agri-environmental payment on farm revenue. If this share is larger than 5%, participation in AESs is effective in promoting greener farming practices in all countries but Spain, where a negative effect on farm income is also shown. <i>(JEL Q15, Q18)</i>

How does longer term participation in agri-environment schemes [re]shape farmers’ environmental dispositions and identities?

There is much debate and conjecture over how participation in agri-environment schemes (AESs) (re)shapes farmers’ environmental actions, understandings and associated identities. This paper develops a unique, temporally sensitive, qualitative approach of revisiting farms—which acts as a corrective to the current, speculative, understandings of how farmers’ relationships with AESs change over time. The paper advances Bourdieusian-inspired ideas of the cultural construct of ‘good farming’ and ‘knowledge cultures’, bringing in the notion of hysteresis in order to develop a temporally-inflected consideration of farmers and their AES involvement. The findings reveal how, over the 10 year period, constructive interchanges have taken place between farmers and conservation officers, and stress the need, when thinking about the cultural sustainability of AESs, to recognise the multiple forms of capital that farms may produce. Conceptually, the paper reshapes the concept of the good farmer to: (1) recognise the geographically-contingent nature of the term; (2) redefine the concept away from the hitherto predominant focus on farming individuals; (3) give closer appreciation of the multiple forms of capital which constitute the good farmer identity (as well as how these intersect with each other); (4) and offer clearer recognition of how the good farmer ideals may evolve and be redefined over time. The paper moves on to make practical recommendations for those developing and administering AESs. Beyond the consideration of farmers, the paper has implications for wider understandings of environmental behaviours and associated identities.

What drives farmers’ participation in EU agri-environmental schemes?: Results from a qualitative meta-analysis

A better understanding of why EU farmers choose to join agri-environmental schemes (AESs) is vital to help policy makers design programmes that would be more attractive to participants. This paper identifies the key factors influencing farmers’ participation in AESs through a qualitative meta-analysis of papers published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2013. A range of empirical studies that explored factors influencing farmers’ willingness to participate in such schemes were selected and systematically analysed. The meta-analysis reveals several key drivers for participation in AESs including fair payments, lower household dependency on agricultural incomes, age and education levels, the presence of a successor and the ability to make progressive rather than step changes to agricultural activities. Of particular importance is the finding that the design of agri-environmental policy is not the only relevant factor influencing uptake but other policies which impact on the farm household and the rural community can also encourage or discourage participation in an AES.

The role of policy priorities and targeting in the spatial location of participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes in Emilia-Romagna (Italy)

The objective of the paper is to understand the determinants of the spatial location of participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes and, in particular, to understand the interplay between structural determinants, priority criteria and spillover effects in guiding participation. As a first step, the paper seeks to conceptualise the issue based on the existing literature. Thereafter, an econometric model is used to provide an empirical application on data regarding participation in measure 214 of the Rural Development Programme 2007–2013 in an Italian region (Emilia-Romagna). The results show that both priority scores and the spatial dimension are significant in affecting participation.