IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aes008/36767.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Farmer Responses to Nitrate Vulnerable Zone Designation in Scotland

Author

Listed:
  • Barnes, Andrew Peter
  • Willock, J.
  • Hall, Clare
  • Luiza, Toma

Abstract

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ) were introduced in response to the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) which states that all EU countries must reduce the nitrate in drinking water to a maximum of 50mg/l. Farmers within a designated NVZ must adhere to strict rules over the timing and application of nitrogen from organic and inorganic sources. In Scotland, four NVZ regions were designated in 2003, covering around 14% of the land area. This paper outlines the results of a recent study to understand farmer activities in response to and attitudes towards NVZ regulations. A telephone survey of 177 farmers was administered, supplemented by four workshops held in each NVZ region. This was to explore, both quantitatively and qualitatively, farmer behaviour and attitudes when operating within these regions. Farmers have only responded to a small extent to the tighter restrictions placed on them after designation in 2003. The bulk of farmers claim to have made little capital investment, the major activity predominantly being in stock-proof fencing. Furthermore, few farmers have invested in increased slurry storage facilities, claiming to have had enough storage capacity before designation to cover the imposed closed period. Farmer attitudes indicate a mostly negative view towards the perceived environmental benefits, water management and towards compliance. This can be explained by a number of concerns raised by farmers towards the scientific basis for designations. Furthermore, farmers viewed the restrictions placed on farming practices within NVZs as too inflexible. This raises a number of issues; i) it suggests that the NVZ regulations adopted by the Scottish Government do not seem to have had a great effect on compromising activity levels, ii) it suggests that transfer of information has not helped to raise awareness of environmental issues; iii) farmers feel their concerns are not likely to be taken into account in terms of the future direction of the regulations; and iv) adoption of best practice is hindered by a belief of ‘victimisation’, regarding the NVZ designations.

Suggested Citation

  • Barnes, Andrew Peter & Willock, J. & Hall, Clare & Luiza, Toma, 2008. "Farmer Responses to Nitrate Vulnerable Zone Designation in Scotland," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36767, Agricultural Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aes008:36767
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.36767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/36767/files/Barnes_wilcock_hall_toma.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.36767?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John W. Cary & Roger L. Wilkinson, 1997. "Perceived Profitability And Farmers‘ Conservation Behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1‐3), pages 13-21, January.
    2. Mathijs, Erik, 2002. "Social Capital and Farmers' Willingness to Adopt Countryside Stewardship Schemes," 13th Congress, Wageningen, The Netherlands, July 7-12, 2002 6981, International Farm Management Association.
    3. David Colman, 1994. "Ethics And Externalities: Agricultural Stewardship And Other Behaviour: Presidential Address," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 299-311, September.
    4. Helle Ravnborg & María Guerrero, 1999. "Collective action in watershed management -- experiences from the Andean hillsides," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 257-266, September.
    5. Joyce Willock & Ian J. Deary & Gareth Edwards‐Jones & Gavin J. Gibson & Murray J. McGregor & Alistair Sutherland & J. Barry Dent & Oliver Morgan & Robert Grieve, 1999. "The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making: Business and Environmentally‐Oriented Behaviour in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 286-303, May.
    6. Geoff A Wilson & Kaley Hart, 2000. "Financial Imperative or Conservation Concern? EU Farmers' Motivations for Participation in Voluntary Agri-Environmental Schemes," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(12), pages 2161-2185, December.
    7. Segerson, Kathleen & Miceli, Thomas J., 1998. "Voluntary Environmental Agreements: Good or Bad News for Environmental Protection?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 109-130, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barnes, A.P. & Willock, J. & Hall, C. & Toma, L., 2009. "Farmer perspectives and practices regarding water pollution control programmes in Scotland," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(12), pages 1715-1722, December.
    2. Toma, Luiza & Mathijs, Erik, 2005. "Determinants of Romanian Farmers' Participation in Agri-Environmental Programmes," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24574, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Dupraz, Pierre, 2008. "Does Intensity Of Change Matter? Factors Affecting Adoption In Two Agri-Environmental Schemes," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6458, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Graversgaard, Morten & Jacobsen, Brian H. & Hoffmann, Carl Christian & Dalgaard, Tommy & Odgaard, Mette Vestergaard & Kjaergaard, Charlotte & Powell, Neil & Strand, John A. & Feuerbach, Peter & Tonder, 2021. "Policies for wetlands implementation in Denmark and Sweden – historical lessons and emerging issues," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Toma, Luiza & Barnes, Andrew Peter & Willock, J. & Hall, Clare, 2008. "A Structural Equation Model of Farmers Operating within Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ) in Scotland," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43643, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Polard, Audrey & Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo, 2015. "The role of network bridging organisations in compensation payments for agri-environmental services under the EU Common Agricultural Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 24-38.
    7. Ambrosius, Floor H.W. & Kramer, Mark R. & Spiegel, Alisa & Bokkers, Eddie A.M. & Bock, Bettina B. & Hofstede, Gert Jan, 2022. "Diffusion of organic farming among Dutch pig farmers: An agent-based model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    8. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    9. Cullen, Paula & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & hUallacháin, Daire Ó & Sheridan, Helen, 2020. "Impact of farmer self-identity and attitudes on participation in agri-environment schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    10. Andrew Barnes & Luiza Toma, 2012. "A typology of dairy farmer perceptions towards climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 507-522, May.
    11. Davies, B.B. & Hodge, I.D., 2007. "Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: A Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 323-333, March.
    12. Aviral Pandey, 2017. "Determinants of system of root intensification (sri) method, in Bihar state, India," Journal of Community Positive Practices, Catalactica NGO, issue 2, pages 3-16.
    13. Zhu, Lanlan & Zhang, Chunman & Cai, Yinying, 2018. "Varieties of agri-environmental schemes in China: A quantitative assessment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 505-517.
    14. Hounsome, Barry & Edwards, Rhiannon T. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2006. "A note on the effect of farmer mental health on adoption: The case of agri-environment schemes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 229-241, December.
    15. Rinaldo Brau & Carlo Carraro, 2011. "The design of voluntary agreements in oligopolistic markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 111-142, April.
    16. Na Li Dawson & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 97-114.
    17. Anne-Sarah Chiambretto & Hubert Stahn, 2017. "Voluntary Management of Fisheries under an Uncertain Background Legislative Threat," Working Papers halshs-01500543, HAL.
    18. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    19. Delgado, Michael S. & Khanna, Neha, 2015. "Voluntary Pollution Abatement and Regulation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 1-20, April.
    20. Blackman, Allen & Guerrero, Santiago, 2012. "What drives voluntary eco-certification in Mexico?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 256-268.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aes008:36767. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aesukea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.