IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719311482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public policy design: Assessing the potential of new collective Agri-Environmental Schemes in the Marais Poitevin wetland region using a participatory approach

Author

Listed:
  • Hardy, Pierre-Yves
  • Dray, Anne
  • Cornioley, Tina
  • David, Maia
  • Sabatier, Rodolphe
  • Kernes, Eric
  • Souchère, Véronique

Abstract

The conciliation between different issues such as agriculture production, biodiversity conservation and water management remains unsolved in many places in the world. As a striking example, the wet grasslands of the Marais Poitevin region (France) presents many obstacles against the integration of these issues, especially in terms of public policy design. The socio-cultural situation in this region shows a high degree of political resistance and questions the relevancy of the current Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) as an incentive for livestock farmers to adopt biodiversity friendly practices favoring the birds’ richness of the area. In this study, we explored the reasons for the poor effect of public policy using a two-fold approach based on ethnographic fieldwork and a role-playing game experiment. The ethnographic fieldwork aimed at understanding the local context and daily lives of farmers and current AES’s difficulties while the observation of the role-playing game session allowed for the exploration of current and alternative policy scenarios. The game represents an archetypal wetland that simulates the grass regeneration, water flows through a canal system and a surrounding network of cultivated plots (wheat, corn, sunflower, alfalfa) and pasture areas. The game is designed for eight players who embody their role in real life, i.e. water managers, biodiversity managers and farmers. The behaviors of the players during the session were observed and analyzed through semantic analysis. The game was structured around two scenarios to allow participants to explore, test and compare the current individual action-oriented AES with alternative collective public policy instruments. Such comparison brings new insights for public policy design. It also highlights the topic of integrated environmental management and questions the relevancy of participatory approaches in striving to resolve contradiction/dilemmas in environmental development.

Suggested Citation

  • Hardy, Pierre-Yves & Dray, Anne & Cornioley, Tina & David, Maia & Sabatier, Rodolphe & Kernes, Eric & Souchère, Véronique, 2020. "Public policy design: Assessing the potential of new collective Agri-Environmental Schemes in the Marais Poitevin wetland region using a participatory approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311482
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104724
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719311482
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104724?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christophe Le Page & Kadiri Serge Bobo & Towa Olivier William Kamgaing & Bobo Fernanda Ngahane & Matthias Waltert, 2015. "Interactive Simulations with a Stylized Scale Model to Codesign with Villagers an Agent-Based Model of Bushmeat Hunting in the Periphery of Korup National Park (Cameroon)," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-8.
    2. Reed, Mark S. & Moxey, Andrew & Prager, Katrin & Hanley, Nick & Skates, James & Bonn, Aletta & Evans, Chris D. & Glenk, Klaus & Thomson, Ken, 2014. "Improving the link between payments and the provision of ecosystem services in agri-environment schemes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 44-53.
    3. Sabatier, Rodolphe & Doyen, Luc & Tichit, Muriel, 2014. "Heterogeneity and the trade-off between ecological and productive functions of agro-landscapes: A model of cattle–bird interactions in a grassland agroecosystem," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 38-49.
    4. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    5. Philippe Le Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2014. "Why pay for nothing? An experiment on a conditional subsidy scheme in a threshold public good game," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(3), pages 1976-1989.
    6. Clémence Moreau & Cécile Barnaud & Raphaël Mathevet, 2019. "Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    7. Anne Dray & Pascal Perez & Natalie Jones & Christophe Le Page & Patrick D'aquino & Ian White & Titeem Auatabu, 2006. "The AtollGame Experience: from Knowledge Engineering to a Computer-Assisted Role Playing Game," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-6.
    8. Moya Kneafsey, 2010. "The region in food--important or irrelevant?," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 3(2), pages 177-190.
    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. Giulia Bazzan & Carsten Daugbjerg & Jale Tosun, 2023. "Attaining policy integration through the integration of new policy instruments: The case of the Farm to Fork Strategy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 803-818, June.
    2. Josias Sanou & Anna Tengberg & Hugues Roméo Bazié & David Mingasson & Madelene Ostwald, 2023. "Assessing Trade-Offs between Agricultural Productivity and Ecosystem Functions: A Review of Science-Based Tools?," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-22, June.
    3. J. Nicolas Hernandez-Aguilera & Max Mauerman & Alexandra Herrera & Kathryn Vasilaky & Walter Baethgen & Ana Maria Loboguerrero & Rahel Diro & Yohana Tesfamariam Tekeste & Daniel Osgood, 2020. "Games and Fieldwork in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, October.

    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. Kanittha Tambunlertchai & Sittidaj Pongkijvorasin, 2020. "The impacts of collective threshold requirements for rewards in a CPR experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 537-554, October.
    2. Westerink, Judith & Pérez-Soba, Marta & van Doorn, Anne, 2020. "Social learning and land lease to stimulate the delivery of ecosystem services in intensive arable farming," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    3. Philippe Coent, 2023. "Payment for environmental services related to aquifers: a review of specific issues and existing programmes," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 273-310, December.
    4. Kristin Limbach & Anne Rozan & Philipe Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2023. "Can collective conditionality improve agri-environmental contracts? From lab to field experiments," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 311-340, December.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Tianran Ding & Wouter Achten, 2023. "Coupling agent-based modeling with territorial LCA to support agricultural land-use planning," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/359527, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    8. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Klaus Glenk & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2017. "Protest Responses and Willingness to Accept: Ecosystem Services Providers’ Preferences towards Incentive-Based Schemes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 801-821, September.
    9. Lapierre, Margaux & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Bougherara, Douadia & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2023. "Designing agri-environmental schemes to cope with uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    10. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    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. Rezende, Daniel Carvalho de, 2014. "Politics in Food Markets: alternative modes of qualification and engaging," Brazilian Journal of Rural Economy and Sociology (Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural-RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 52(2), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Živojinović, I. & Weiss, G. & Wilding, M. & Wong, J.L.G. & Ludvig, A., 2020. "Experiencing forest products – An innovation trend by rural entrepreneurs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    14. Ouvrard, Benjamin & Abildtrup, Jens & Bostedt, Göran & Stenger, Anne, 2019. "Determinants of forest owners attitudes towards wood ash recycling in Sweden - Can the nutrient cycle be closed?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Natalie A Jones & Pascal Perez & Thomas G Measham & Gail J Kelly & Patrick D’Aquino & Katherine Daniell & Anne Dray & Nils Ferrand, 2008. "Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    16. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Manyise, Timothy & Dentoni, Domenico, 2021. "Value chain partnerships and farmer entrepreneurship as balancing ecosystem services: Implications for agri-food systems resilience," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    20. Bougherara, Douadia & Lapierre, Margaux & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2021. "Do farmers prefer increasing, decreasing, or stable payments in Agri-environmental schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(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:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311482. 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.