IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae11/114773.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An analytical framework for soil degradation, farming practices, institutions and policy responses

Author

Listed:
  • Prager, Katrin
  • Schuler, Johannes
  • Helming, Katharina
  • Zander, Peter
  • Ratinger, Tomas
  • Hagedorn, Konrad

Abstract

There is a lack of knowledge about the effectiveness and efficiency of soil conservation policies in agriculture and little understanding of how policy measures should be designed to encourage farmers to adopt soil conservation practices. This paper analyzes institutional settings surrounding agricultural soil management in ten European countries based on the Institutions of Sustainability framework. This framework considers the interdependencies between ecological and social systems, taking into account environmental conditions, farming practices impacting on soil conservation, different types of actors, policies, institutions and governance structures. The purpose of this paper is to describe the analytical framework and the methodology that all case studies are based on, present and discuss compared findings, outline implications for successful soil conservation policy, and draw conclusions on the methodological approach. The case studies focused on the main soil degradation types occurring across Europe which are addressed by a broad range of mandatory and incentive policies. The findings highlight the following issues: i) the need to design policies that target the locally most common soil threats and processes in the light of agricultural management; ii) the need to take farming management constraints into consideration, (iii) the need for good communication and cooperation both between agricultural and environmental authorities as well as between governmental and non-governmental stakeholders; iv) the necessary mix of mandatory and incentive instruments; and v) the need for data and monitoring systems allowing the evaluation of the effectiveness of policies and soil conservation practices.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114773
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.114773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/114773/files/Prager_Katrin_492.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agri‐environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    3. Konrad Hagedorn, 2008. "Particular requirements for institutional analysis in nature-related sectors," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 357-384, September.
    4. Wanhong Yang & Alfons Weersink, 2004. "Cost-effective Targeting of Riparian Buffers," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 52(1), pages 17-34, March.
    5. R. Maria Saleth & Ariel Dinar, 2004. "The Institutional Economics of Water : A Cross-Country Analysis of Institutions and Performance," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 14884, November.
    6. 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.
    7. Robert Ryan & Donna Erickson & Raymond De Young, 2003. "Farmers' Motivations for Adopting Conservation Practices along Riparian Zones in a Mid-western Agricultural Watershed," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 19-37.
    8. Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Dupraz, Pierre, 2008. "Re-considering Agri-Environmental Schemes premiums: the impact of fixed costs in sign-up decisions," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43606, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Franco, Juan Agustin & Calatrava-Requena, Javier, 2008. "Adoption and diffusion of no tillage practices in Southern Spain olive groves," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44014, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Wim Verbeke, 2002. "Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri‐environmental Measures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 489-511, November.
    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. Gachango, Florence Gathoni & Andersen, Laura Mørch & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2015. "Adoption of voluntary water-pollution reduction technologies and water quality perception among Danish farmers," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 235-244.
    2. Ricci, G.F. & Jeong, J. & De Girolamo, A.M. & Gentile, F., 2020. "Effectiveness and feasibility of different management practices to reduce soil erosion in an agricultural watershed," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Nadia Glæsner & Katharina Helming & Wim De Vries, 2014. "Do Current European Policies Prevent Soil Threats and Support Soil Functions?," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(12), pages 1-26, December.
    4. Eduardo Oliveira & Silvia Tobias & Anna M. Hersperger, 2018. "Can Strategic Spatial Planning Contribute to Land Degradation Reduction in Urban Regions? State of the Art and Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Griewald, Yuliana, 2018. "The Art of the State to Intervene: Insights Into Agricultural Land Management in Russia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-9.

    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. Ioanna Grammatikopoulou & Eija Pouta & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Exploring the determinants for adopting water conservation measures. What is the tendency of landowners when the resource is already at risk?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 993-1014, June.
    2. Rosario Perez-Espejo & Alonso Aguilar Ibarra & Jose Luis Escobedo-Sagaz, 2011. "Agriculture and Water Pollution: Farmers' Perceptions in Central Mexico," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 263-273, March.
    3. Arata, Linda & Sckokai, P., 2013. "Impact of Agri-environmental Schemes on Farm Performances in five EU Member States," 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy 149771, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    4. Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo & Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Fabbri, Giorgio, 2020. "Using environmental knowledge brokers to promote deep green agri-environment measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Elofsson, Katarina, 2014. "International knowledge diffusion and its impact on the cost-effective clean-up of the Baltic Sea," Working Paper Series 2014:06, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    6. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2015. "Farm size and participation in agri-environmental measures: Farm-level evidence from Slovenia," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 273-282.
    7. Bertoni, Danilo & Curzi, Daniele & Aletti, Giacomo & Olper, Alessandro, 2020. "Estimating the effects of agri-environmental measures using difference-in-difference coarsened exact matching," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Campus, Daniela, 2014. "Evaluating agri-environmental schemes. The case of Tuscany," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 172969, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    9. Calvet, Coralie & Le Coent, Philippe & Napoleone, Claude & Quétier, Fabien, 2019. "Challenges of achieving biodiversity offset outcomes through agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from an empirical study in Southern France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 113-125.
    10. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    11. Wieck, Christine & Annen, Dominic N., 2012. "Participation, compliance and synergies at the farm level between the single payments scheme and farm certification labels," Discussion Papers 122123, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.
    12. Doris Läpple, 2010. "Adoption and Abandonment of Organic Farming: An Empirical Investigation of the Irish Drystock Sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 697-714, September.
    13. Finocchio, Romina & Esposti, Roberto, 2008. "Determinants of farm diversification and interaction with the CAP. An application to FADN of Marche region (Italy)," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44251, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Bertoni, Danilo & Olper, Alessandro, 2012. "The Political Economy Of Agri-Environmental Measures: An Empirical Assessment At The Eu Regional Level," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 6(3-4), pages 1-12, November.
    15. Cisilino, Federica & Bodini, Antonella & Zanoli, Agostina & Lasorella, Maria Valentina, 2018. "Exploring Agri-environmental effectiveness using counterfactual analysis," 162nd Seminar, April 26-27, 2018, Budapest, Hungary 271958, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2016. "Sustainable participation behaviour in agri-environmental measures," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 47-58.
    17. David Conner & Jennifer Miller & Asim Zia & Qingbin Wang & Heather Darby, 2016. "Conjoint Analysis of Farmers’ Response to Conservation Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(7), pages 1-15, July.
    18. Christensen, Tove & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Orstead & Morkbak, Morten Raun & Hasler, Berit & Denver, Sigrid, 2010. "How to increase the effectiveness of agri-environmental subsidy schemes through knowledge of farmer perceptions-a choice experiment on pesticide free buffer zones," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109316, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Foundjem-Tita, Divine & D’Haese, Marijke & Speelman, Stjin & Degrande, Ann & Gyau, Amos & Van Damme, Patrick & Tchoundjeu, Zac & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2014. "Would strictly enforced forestry regulations affect farmers’ stated intentions to plant indigenous fruits trees? Insights from Cameroon," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 95-106.
    20. Whitten, Stuart M. & Reeson, Andrew & Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2013. "Designing conservation tenders to support landholder participation: A framework and case study assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 82-92.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm Management;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaae11:114773. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.