IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Case study of agri-environmental payments: The United Kingdom

Listed author(s):
  • Dobbs, Thomas L.
  • Pretty, Jules
Registered author(s):

    The Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) program, when launched in the United Kingdom (UK) in 1986, was the first agri-environmental program in the European Union (EU). This program grew to a total of 43 designated ESA schemes in the UK as a whole, 22 of which were in England. A variety of agri-environmental payments programs were created to supplement and complement the ESA schemes in years to follow. The most prominent of these in England was the Countryside Stewardship Scheme (CSS), established in 1991. The CSS was available to farmers outside the ESAs, and like the ESA program, was intended to protect valued landscapes and habitats and to improve public enjoyment of the countryside. By 2003, over 10% of England's agricultural land was enrolled in either ESA or CSS agreements. These voluntary agreements were long-term contracts (usually for 10Â years) between the government and farmers to provide environmental services. Several major evaluations of the ESA program and the CSS were conducted over the years, and the results of many of those evaluations and the lessons derived are synthesized and summarized in this article. Both the ESA program and the CSS proved to be generally effective in enrolling many farmers in the entry-level contract tiers, thereby halting or slowing degradation of rural landscape and other environmental features. However, the schemes did not generally offer sufficient economic incentives to attract high levels of enrollment in the intensive farming areas. Also, the schemes were limited in their success in enrolling farmers in higher payment tiers, tiers that required more substantial changes in farming practices. The high crop and livestock-related payments received by farmers under the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) contributed to the disincentives to participate, especially in higher tiers. Following the latest (2003) reforms of the EU's CAP, England's ESA program and CSS are being replaced by a new, consolidated package of schemes that draws on lessons learned over the past 15-20Â years with these two flagship programs.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 65 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 4 (May)
    Pages: 765-775

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:65:y:2008:i:4:p:765-775
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. L. Harrison-Mayfield & J. Dwyer & G. Brookes, 1998. "The Socio-Economic Effects of the Countryside Stewardship Scheme," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 157-170.
    2. G. D. Garrod & K. G. Willis, 1995. "Valuing The Benefits Of The South Downs Environmentally Sensitive Area," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 160-173.
    3. Martin Whitby, 2000. "Challenges and Options for the UK Agri-Environment: Presidential Address," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 317-332.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:65:y:2008:i:4:p:765-775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.