IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v76y2018icp697-707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding farmers’ motivations for providing unsubsidised environmental benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Mills, Jane
  • Gaskell, Peter
  • Ingram, Julie
  • Chaplin, Stephen

Abstract

This paper examines farmers’ motivations for voluntary unsubsidised practices that benefit the environment. It identifies amongst a group of English farmers the amount of unsubsidised environmental activities on mainly arable land, and explores the extent to which motivations are extrinsic and intrinsic for undertaking this unsubsidised activity. Using responses from a national survey in England of 1,345 farmers, in-depth face-to-face interviews with 60 farmers and an analysis of existing agri-environment scheme data, the extent to which subsidised and unsubsidised environmental activity is undertaken on arable land was identified. Furthermore, it was also possible to identify and compare the motivations behind subsidised and unsubsidised environmental activity and to understand the interaction between these two types of activity at the farm scale. The research found that around 25% of all environmental activity undertaken on arable farms in England is unsubsidised, although some of this activity sits alongside subsidised activity. There were clear differences between the motivations for undertaking subsidised and unsubsidised environmental activities. Financial reasons dominated farmers’ motivations for engaging in subsidised agri-environment scheme practices, whilst agronomic and environmental motivations were of greater importance for unsubsidised activity. Data analysis also revealed over-subscription in agri-environment schemes, with a considerable amount of environmental activity occurring without payment. From a policy perspective it is helpful to understand motivations for existing unsubsidised environmental activity as this can inform the design of advice and message framing to encourage uptake of more widespread voluntary environmental behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Mills, Jane & Gaskell, Peter & Ingram, Julie & Chaplin, Stephen, 2018. "Understanding farmers’ motivations for providing unsubsidised environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 697-707.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:697-707
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026483771631359X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.053?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben B. Davies & Ian D. Hodge, 2006. "Farmers’ Preferences for New Environmental Policy Instruments: Determining the Acceptability of Cross Compliance for Biodiversity Benefits," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 393-414, September.
    2. Søren C. Winter & Peter J. May, 2001. "Motivation for Compliance with Environmental Regulations," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 675-698.
    3. Ayer, Harry W., 1997. "Grass Roots Collective Action: Agricultural Opportunities," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(01), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Pretty, J. N. & Brett, C. & Gee, D. & Hine, R. E. & Mason, C. F. & Morison, J. I. L. & Raven, H. & Rayment, M. D. & van der Bijl, G., 2000. "An assessment of the total external costs of UK agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 113-136, August.
    5. Spash, Clive L. & Biel, Anders, 2002. "Social psychology and economics in environmental research," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 551-555, October.
    6. Berentsen, Paul B.M. & Hendriksen, Astrid & Heijman, Wim J.M. & van Vlokhoven, Haske A., 2007. "Costs and benefits of on-farm nature conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 571-579, May.
    7. 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.
    8. Aaker, Jennifer L & Lee, Angela Y, 2001. ""I" Seek Pleasures and "We" Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 33-49, June.
    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. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.
    2. Bartosz Bartkowski & Stephan Bartke, 2018. "Leverage Points for Governing Agricultural Soils: A Review of Empirical Studies of European Farmers’ Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-27, September.
    3. Prager, Katrin & Schuler, Johannes & Helming, Katharina & Zander, Peter & Ratinger, Tomas & Hagedorn, Konrad, 2011. "An analytical framework for soil degradation, farming practices, institutions and policy responses," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114773, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Andrew J Tanentzap & Anthony Lamb & Susan Walker & Andrew Farmer, 2015. "Resolving Conflicts between Agriculture and the Natural Environment," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    5. Buckley, Cathal, 2012. "Implementation of the EU Nitrates Directive in the Republic of Ireland — A view from the farm," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 29-36.
    6. Chen, Zengxiang & Huang, Yunhui, 2016. "Cause-related marketing is not always less favorable than corporate philanthropy: The moderating role of self-construal," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 868-880.
    7. Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & van der Ham, Corinda, 2014. "Costs and benefits associated with the externalities generated by Dutch agriculture," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia & Hölzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich, 2010. "Regulatory fit effects on perceived fiscal exchange and tax compliance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 271-277, April.
    9. Windfeldt, Louise & Madsen, Lene Møller, 2018. "Communicating plant genetic resources for food and agriculture to the public—A study of grant-receivers with demonstration-projects in the Danish Rural Development Programme," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 512-523.
    10. Zhang, Zibin & Yang, Wenxin & Ye, Jianliang, 2021. "Why sulfur dioxide emissions decline significantly from coal-fired power plants in China? Evidence from the desulfurated electricity pricing premium program," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PB).
    11. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    12. Eric Tollens, 2004. "Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one euro question," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(1), pages 1-18, March.
    13. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    14. Leibbrandt, Andreas & Lynham, John, 2018. "Does the allocation of property rights matter in the commons?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 201-217.
    15. Adams, Leen & Faseur, Tineke & Geuens, Maggie, 2010. "The Influence of the Self-Regulatory Focus on the Effectiveness of Stop-Smoking Campaigns for Young Smokers," Working Papers 2010/38, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    16. Franco Valdez, Ana Dolores & Valdez Cervantes, Alfonso & Motyka, Scott, 2018. "Beauty is truth: The effects of inflated product claims and website interactivity on evaluations of retailers' websites," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 67-74.
    17. . Abhishek & Arvind Sahay, 2013. "Role of Culture in Celebrity Endorsement: Brand Endorsement by Celebrities in Indian Context-A Review, Synthesis and Research Propositions," Working Papers id:5432, eSocialSciences.
    18. Jesse L. Reynolds & Edward A. Parson, 2020. "Nonstate governance of solar geoengineering research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 323-342, May.
    19. Adrian Sadłowski & Wioletta Wrzaszcz & Katarzyna Smędzik-Ambroży & Anna Matras-Bolibok & Anna Budzyńska & Marek Angowski & Stefan Mann, 2021. "Direct Payments and Sustainable Agricultural Development—The Example of Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Jeroen van der Heijden & Jitske de Jong, 2009. "Towards a Better Understanding of Building Regulation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(6), pages 1038-1052, December.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:697-707. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.