IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cbu/jrnlec/y2024v5p361-370.html

Calculating Result-Based Agri-Environment Payments – Learning From The Front-Runners

Author

Listed:
  • STANIMIRA DUDOVA

    (UNIVERSITY OF NATIONAL AND WORLD ECONOMY)

Abstract

Result-based agri-environment payments (RBAPs) represent an innovative approach to incentivizing sustainable farming by linking payments to measurable environmental outcomes, such as biodiversity enhancement, water quality, and soil health. This paper explores the mechanisms used to calculate these payments across different countries, including Germany and Ireland, where result-based schemes are well-established. Drawing on design process analyses and case studies, the aim of the research is to investigates how payments are structured to reflect costs such as opportunity costs, management expenses, income forgone and transaction costs. Results indicate that while RBAPs offer flexibility and encourage farmer innovation, they also introduce complexity in payment calculation, requiring detailed cost assessments and robust monitoring systems. Despite these challenges, the schemes in these countries demonstrate the potential of result-based approaches to deliver targeted environmental benefits. The study concludes that successful RBAPs must balance fair compensation for farmers with effective incentive structures, while addressing risks and uncertainties associated with achieving ecological outcomes. This research provides valuable insights into the design and calculation of result-based payments.

Suggested Citation

  • Stanimira Dudova, 2024. "Calculating Result-Based Agri-Environment Payments – Learning From The Front-Runners," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 5, pages 361-370, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbu:jrnlec:y:2024:v:5:p:361-370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.utgjiu.ro/revista/ec/pdf/2024-05/39_Stanimira.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salomon Espinosa Diaz & Francesco Riccioli & Francesco Di Iacovo & Roberta Moruzzo, 2023. "Transaction Costs in Agri-Environment-Climate Measures: A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Herzon, I. & Birge, T. & Allen, B. & Povellato, A. & Vanni, F. & Hart, K. & Radley, G. & Tucker, G. & Keenleyside, C. & Oppermann, R. & Underwood, E. & Poux, X. & Beaufoy, G. & Pražan, J., 2018. "Time to look for evidence: Results-based approach to biodiversity conservation on farmland in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 347-354.
    3. Mettepenningen, E. & Beckmann, V. & Eggers, J., 2011. "Public transaction costs of agri-environmental schemes and their determinants--Analysing stakeholders' involvement and perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 641-650, February.
    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. Matthew C. LaFevor & Alexandra G. Ponette-González & Rebecca Larson & Leah M. Mungai, 2021. "Spatial Targeting of Agricultural Support Measures: Indicator-Based Assessment of Coverages and Leakages," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Farmers’ preferences over alternative AECS designs. Do the ecological conditions influence the willingness to accept result-based contracts?," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334508, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    3. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    4. Martin Drechsler, 2026. "Result-Based vs. Action-Based Payments in Spatially Heterogeneous Landscapes: A Systematic Model-Based Comparison," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 89(2), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Elisabeth Christen & Gabriel Felbermayr & Hans Pitlik & Franz Sinabell, 2026. "Options for Implementing the Polluter Pays Principle in Agriculture. A New Approach for the EU's Common Agricultural Policy," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 66595070.
    6. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    7. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    8. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, "undated". "Farmers’ acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes – insights from a case study in North Rhine-Westphalia," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317066, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    9. Šumrada, Tanja & Vreš, Branko & Čelik, Tatjana & Šilc, Urban & Rac, Ilona & Udovč, Andrej & Erjavec, Emil, 2021. "Are result-based schemes a superior approach to the conservation of High Nature Value grasslands? Evidence from Slovenia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Markova-Nenova, Nonka & Engler, Jan O. & Cord, Anna F. & Wätzold, Frank, 2023. "A Cost Comparison Analysis of Bird-Monitoring Techniques for Result-Based Payments in Agriculture," MPRA Paper 116311, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Sidemo-Holm, William & Smith, Henrik G. & Brady, Mark V., 2018. "Improving agricultural pollution abatement through result-based payment schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 209-219.
    12. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Droste, Nils & Ließ, Mareike & Sidemo-Holm, William & Weller, Ulrich & Brady, Mark V., 2019. "Implementing result-based agri-environmental payments by means of modelling," UFZ Discussion Papers 5/2019, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    13. Catharina Druckenbrod & Volker Beckmann, 2018. "Production-Integrated Compensation in Environmental Offsets—A Review of a German Offset Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    14. Harzer, Sophie & Quaas, Martin F., 2026. "Differentiated vs. homogeneous payments for biodiversity conservation — Microeconomic theory and systematic literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    15. Vogt, Nora & Reeson, Andrew F. & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "Communication, competition and social gift exchange in an auction for public good provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 11-19.
    16. Nick Hanley & Simanti Banerjee & Gareth D. Lennox & Paul R. Armsworth, 2012. "How should we incentivize private landowners to ‘produce’ more biodiversity?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 93-113, Spring.
    17. Gerling, Charlotte & Drechsler, Martin & Keuler, Klaus & Sturm, Astrid & Wätzold, Frank, 2022. "Time to consider the timing of conservation measures: designing cost-effective agri-environment schemes under climate change," MPRA Paper 113877, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. O’Rourke Eileen, 2019. "Drivers of Land Abandonment in the Irish Uplands: A Case Study," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 11(2), pages 211-228, June.
    19. Banerjee, Simanti & Conte, Marc N., "undated". "Balancing Complexity and Rent-Seeking in Multi-Attribute Conservation Procurement Auctions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266293, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Süring, Charlotte Marie & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark, 2025. "Private forest owner preferences for action- and result-based biodiversity restoration contracts – A discrete choice experiment in Denmark and Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cbu:jrnlec:y:2024:v:5:p:361-370. 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: Ecobici Nicolae (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fetgjro.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.