Agri-environmental measures (AEM) are an agricultural policy instrument for enhancing of agricultural practices and activities that go beyond the basic environmental standards. Formulation of agri-environmental measures is a complex substantive, organisational and participatory process. Decision-makers are faced with the difficult task of selecting appropriate design of measures, while the available options and their (dis)advantages are in most part not readily available. The purpose of this paper is to outline a typology of possible AEM in terms of the basis for payments, coordination of actions and selection of beneficiaries. Furthermore, the paper provides an overview of the applicability and implementation of particular measures in practice, which is based on a literature review and an analysis of measures in the EU and EFTA Member States. In the European Union, AEM are among the essential instruments in the field of environmental protection and nature conservation. However, research shows that despite a substantial budgetary allocation, AEM have relatively small environmental impacts. Over the last two decades, various new designs of AEM have been tested in an attempt to improve their environmental effectiveness and efficiency. Predominantly management-based measures are thus becoming more result-oriented and more spatially targeted. Some European countries have also piloted the implementation of collective action by farmers and other stakeholders to achieve environmental and nature conservation objectives.
COBISS.SI-ID: 30175235
The paper considers the problem of improving result orientation and spatial coordination of agri-environmental schemes (AES). A choice experiment approach was used to test farmers’ willingness-to-accept a payment-by-results scheme to conserve extensive management of two dry grassland habitat types, protected under the EU Habitats Directive. Furthermore, preferences for a conditional agglomeration bonus and different types of knowledge transfer were tested. The survey included 510 farmers in two Natura 2000 sites in Slovenia. The selected research areas are characterised by unfavourable age and education structure of the farmer population, fragmented land ownership, and natural limitations, which prevent agricultural intensification. The majority of farmers preferred pure or hybrid result-based schemes whereas a smaller class of farmers was found to favour the current management-based system. Most farmers also preferred various types of group learning and individual advisory support compared to standard lectures. A conditional collective bonus, on the other hand, was not deemed important. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first research using a choice experiment approach to test farmers’ preferences for outcome-based schemes, making it relevant for designing future AES.
COBISS.SI-ID: 27727363