| 1. |
- Brown, Calum, et al.
(författare)
-
Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Land Use Policy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0264-8377. ; 101
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Union Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has failed to achieve its aim of preserving European farmland biodiversity, despite massive investment in subsidies to incentivise environmentally-beneficial farming practices. This failure calls into question the design of the subsidy schemes, which are intended to either function as a safety net and make farming profitable or compensate farmers for costs and loss of income while undertaking environmental management. In this study, we assess whether the design of environmental payments in the CAP reflects current knowledge about farmers’ decision-making as found in the research literature. We do so on the basis of a comprehensive literature review on farmers’ uptake of agri-environmental management practices over the past 10 years and interviews specifically focused on Ecological Focus Areas with policy-makers, advisors and farmers in seven European countries. We find that economic and structural factors are the most commonly-identified determinants of farmers’ adoption of environmental management practices in the literature and in interviews. However, the literature suggests that these are complemented by – and partially dependent on – a broad range of social, attitudinal and other contextual factors that are not recognised in interview responses or, potentially, in policy design. The relatively simplistic conceptualisation of farmer behaviour that underlies some aspects of policy design may hamper the effectiveness of environmental payments in the CAP by over-emphasising economic considerations, potentially corroding farmer attitudes to policy and environmental objectives. We conclude that an urgent redesign of agricultural subsidies is needed to better align them with the economic, social and environmental factors affecting farmer decision-making in a complex production climate, and therefore to maximise potential environmental benefits.
|
|
| 2. |
- Brown, Calum, et al.
(författare)
-
Understanding farmer uptake of measures that support biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) : An EKLIPSE Expert Working Group report
- 2019
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Recent scientific research highlights the urgent need to protect Europe’s remaining – and rapidly declining– biological diversity. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is one of the major tools with which policymakers in the European Union (EU) can achieve this aim. However, so far, the CAP has proved largely ineffective – or even detrimental – to this goal. With relatively localised exceptions, the Policy’s notable success in ensuring supplies of food and fiber by supporting Europe’s farmers has been at the expense of environmental objectives. This report presents the findings of an Expert Working Group (EWG) convened to explore the ways in which the Common Agricultural Policy could be made more effective in protecting biodiversity and delivering associated ecosystem services, particularly through the implementation of effective biodiversity measures by Europe’s farmers. The EWG was established with a focus on Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs), a policy instrument introduced tothe CAP in the period 2014 - 2020, who broadened this remit to also consider evidence from other measures. In the first of three main strands of research (Step A), we synthesised the findings of recent reviews that investigate the most beneficial measures for biodiversity on farmland. In the second (Step B), we reviewed the factors affecting the design and selection of these measures at European, national and farm scales. In the third (Step C), we used our findings to develop recommendations for improving the impacts of the CAP on biodiversity and associated ecosystem services. The bulk of our work focused on Step B, in particular a new assessment of factors affecting farmer’s uptake of relevant measures, and a series of interviews with farmers’ representatives to further develop our insights and findings.
|
|
