IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v83y2019icp147-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An assessment of the landscape-scale dimensions of land based environmental management schemes offered to farmers in England

Author

Listed:
  • Franks, Jeremy R.

Abstract

This study reviews the evolution of environmental land management and agri-environment schemes (AES) offered to farmers in England between 1979 and 2015 from the perspective of their potential to deliver landscape-scale, i.e. cross farm boundary, environmental benefits. The review uses population conservation theory, which underpinned the recommendations in the Lawton report (Lawton et al., 2010), to identify eight characteristics of these schemes with this potential. These characteristics form a framework which is used to assess the potential landscape-scale impacts of Countryside Stewardship, the AES recently introduced in England. The Mid Tier of Countryside Stewardship provides financial assistance to facilitators to help farmers organise and manage Farmer Groups. A Farmer Group must consist of four or more neighbouring farmers, who between them farm over 2,000 ha. Each member of a Farmer Group is required to submit an individual application, but each application must demonstrate that it “go[es] beyond [the environmental benefits that] could be delivered by individual holdings acting in isolation”. After the 2017 round, 98 Farmer Groups had been funded, involving 1915 farmer members, covering 451,064 ha. Primarily because of this innovation, Countryside Stewardship is considered to be the most landscape-scale orientated AES offered to farmers in England. A consideration of the evolution towards landscape-scale attributes in environmental land management schemes leads into a discussion of how future changes to four key AES characteristics – identified in the review – may influence how the landscape-scale dimension develops in the next generation of AES.

Suggested Citation

  • Franks, Jeremy R., 2019. "An assessment of the landscape-scale dimensions of land based environmental management schemes offered to farmers in England," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 147-159.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:83:y:2019:i:c:p:147-159
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.01.044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718304290
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.01.044?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gottfried, Robert & Wear, David & Lee, Robert, 1996. "Institutional solutions to market failure on the landscape scale," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 133-140, August.
    2. Dieter Helm, 2017. "Agriculture after Brexit," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(suppl_1), pages 124-133.
    3. 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.
    4. Riley, Mark & Sangster, Heather & Smith, Hugh & Chiverrell, Richard & Boyle, John, 2018. "Will farmers work together for conservation? The potential limits of farmers’ cooperation in agri-environment measures," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 635-646.
    5. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F. & Bastian, Chris & Kivi, Paul & Donner, Jennifer & Smith, Rodney B. W., 2002. "Agglomeration bonus: an incentive mechanism to reunite fragmented habitat for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 305-328, May.
    6. Westerink, Judith & Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & Prager, Katrin & Franks, Jeremy & Dupraz, Pierre & Mettepenningen, Evy, 2017. "Collaborative governance arrangements to deliver spatially coordinated agri-environmental management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 176-192.
    7. 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.
    8. Lobley, Matt & Turner, Martin M. & MacQueen, Greg & Wakefield, Dawn, 2005. ""Born out of Crisis": an analysis of moorland management agreements on Exmoor; final report," Research Reports 31750, University of Exeter, Centre for Rural Policy Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francesca L. Falco & Eran Feitelson & Tamar Dayan, 2021. "Spatial Scale Mismatches in the EU Agri-Biodiversity Conservation Policy. The Case for a Shift to Landscape-Scale Design," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Daniel Kpienbaareh & Rachel Bezner Kerr & Isaac Luginaah & Jinfei Wang & Esther Lupafya & Laifolo Dakishoni & Lizzie Shumba, 2020. "Spatial and Ecological Farmer Knowledge and Decision-Making about Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, September.
    3. Clements, Jen & Lobley, Matt & Osborne, Juliet & Wills, Jane, 2021. "How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Nguyen, Chi & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2023. "Assessing the performance of agglomeration bonus in budget-constrained conservation auctions," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334544, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    5. Thomas, Emma & Riley, Mark & Spees, Jack, 2020. "Knowledge flows: Farmers’ social relations and knowledge sharing practices in ‘Catchment Sensitive Farming’," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Prager, Katrin, 2022. "Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Francois Bareille & Matteo Zavalloni & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2021. "Cooperative Management of Ecosystem Services: Coalition Formation, Landscape Structure and Policies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(2), pages 323-356, June.
    8. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Ziv, Guy & Chapman, Pippa J. & Holden, Joseph & Cardwell, Michael & Fyfe, Duncan, 2023. "A window into land managers’ preferences for new forms of agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from a post-Brexit analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    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. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Arnott, David & Chadwick, David & Harris, Ian & Koj, Aleksandra & Jones, David L., 2019. "What can management option uptake tell us about ecosystem services delivery through agri-environment schemes?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 194-208.
    3. Johanna Norris & Bettina Matzdorf & Rena Barghusen & Christoph Schulze & Bart van Gorcum, 2021. "Viewpoints on Cooperative Peatland Management: Expectations and Motives of Dutch Farmers," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    4. François Bareille & Matteo Zavalloni & Davide Viaggi, 2023. "Agglomeration bonus and endogenous group formation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 76-98, January.
    5. Fei Meng & Hang Chen & Zhenning Yu & Wu Xiao & Yongzhong Tan, 2022. "What Drives Farmers to Participate in Rural Environmental Governance? Evidence from Villages in Sandu Town, Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Runhaar, Hens & Polman, Nico, 2018. "Partnering for nature conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 11-19.
    7. Levin, Gregor & Jepsen, Martin Rudbeck, 2010. "Abolition of set-aside schemes, associated impacts on habitat structure and modelling of potential effects of cross-farm regulation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(22), pages 2728-2737.
    8. Huber, Robert & Zabel, Astrid & Schleiffer, Mirjam & Vroege, Willemijn & Brändle, Julia M. & Finger, Robert, 2021. "Conservation Costs Drive Enrolment in Agglomeration Bonus Scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    9. Simanti Banerjee & Timothy N. Cason & Frans P. de Vries & Nick Hanley, 2021. "Spatial Coordination and Joint Bidding in Conservation Auctions," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 8(5), pages 1013-1049.
    10. Jasper R. de Vries & Eva van der Zee & Raoul Beunen & Rianne Kat & Peter H. Feindt, 2019. "Trusting the People and the System. The Interrelation Between Interpersonal and Institutional Trust in Collective Action for Agri-Environmental Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Prager, Katrin, 2022. "Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    12. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    13. Alotaibi, Bader Alhafi & Kassem, Hazem S. & AL-Zaidi, Abdullah & Alyafrsi, Mohamad A., 2020. "Farmers’ awareness of agri-environmental legislation in Saudi Arabia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Marie Asma Ben-Othmen & Mariia Ostapchuk, 2023. "How diverse are farmers’ preferences for large-scale grassland ecological restoration? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 341-375, December.
    15. Han, Guang & Arbuckle, J. Gordon & Grudens-Schuck, Nancy, 2021. "Motivations, goals, and benefits associated with organic grain farming by producers in Iowa, U.S," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Blackstock, K.L. & Novo, P. & Byg, A. & Creaney, R. & Juarez Bourke, A. & Maxwell, J.L. & Tindale, S.J. & Waylen, K.A., 2021. "Policy instruments for environmental public goods: Interdependencies and hybridity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Berthet, Alice & Vincent, Audrey & Fleury, Philippe, 2021. "Water quality issues and agriculture: An international review of innovative policy schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Bethwell, Claudia & Sattler, Claudia & Stachow, Ulrich, 2022. "An analytical framework to link governance, agricultural production practices, and the provision of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    19. Nguyen, Chi & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Hanley, Nick & Schilizzi, Steven & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2022. "Spatial Coordination Incentives for landscape-scale environmental management: A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    20. Bartolini, Fabio & Vergamini, Daniele & Longhitano, Davide & Povellato, Andrea, 2021. "Do differential payments for agri-environment schemes affect the environmental benefits? A case study in the North-Eastern Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    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:83:y:2019:i:c:p:147-159. 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.