IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v136y2024ics0264837723004404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The opportunities and challenges to co-designing policy options for tree health with policy makers, researchers and land managers

Author

Listed:
  • Ambrose-Oji, Bianca
  • Urquhart, Julie
  • Hemery, Gabriel
  • Petrokofsky, Gillian
  • O’Brien, Liz
  • Jones, Glyn D.
  • Karlsdóttir, Berglind

Abstract

We describe experiences between 2018 and 2021 co-designing tree health policy options linked with the UK’s evolving land use policy post EU-Exit within the Future Farming and Countryside Programme. Policy makers, researchers and more than 250 land managers took part in a series of co-design engagements in a three-phase iterative co-design process that culminated in a new Tree Health Pilot. After defining the components of co-design, we describe how relationships between policy makers, researchers and land managers were built, the methods researchers introduced into the process to build capability and support participation, and the outcomes in terms of the key opportunities and challenges for policy co-design. We conclude that it is possible to move policy design beyond user focused research and into co-design. However, this relies on adequate time and resources required to build trust and fully engage all parties in a meaningful way, including the development of tools and techniques that include experimentation, different knowledge types, and moving from research and evidence collection into design. Having policy makers with participatory mindsets in the same space as land managers was important to facilitating active learning between all of those involved in the collective. Researchers played a critical role in the co-design, balancing the views and understandings of the policy community with those of the land manager community, facilitating learning, and selecting tools and techniques to make design options explicit. We conclude that policy co-design in the land-based and environmental sector is a real opportunity at an early stage of realisation, but the effectiveness and range of positive and negative outcomes and impacts will need to be evaluated in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Ambrose-Oji, Bianca & Urquhart, Julie & Hemery, Gabriel & Petrokofsky, Gillian & O’Brien, Liz & Jones, Glyn D. & Karlsdóttir, Berglind, 2024. "The opportunities and challenges to co-designing policy options for tree health with policy makers, researchers and land managers," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:136:y:2024:i:c:s0264837723004404
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723004404
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106974?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. Sheremet, Oleg & Ruokamo, Enni & Juutinen, Artti & Svento, Rauli & Hanley, Nick, 2018. "Incentivising Participation and Spatial Coordination in Payment for Ecosystem Service Schemes: Forest Disease Control Programs in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 260-272.
    2. 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).
    3. Federica Cisilino & Francesco Vanni, 2019. "Agri-environmental collaborative projects: Challenges and perspectives in Italy," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 21(2), pages 459-479.
    4. Hasanagas, Nikolaos D., 2016. "Managing information in forest policy networks: Distinguishing the influential actors from the “postmen”," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 73-80.
    5. Jane C. S. Long & Steve Hamburg & John Shepherd, 2012. "More ways to govern geoengineering," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7403), pages 323-323, June.
    6. Potter, Clive & Urquhart, Julie, 2017. "Tree disease and pest epidemics in the Anthropocene: A review of the drivers, impacts and policy responses in the UK," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 61-68.
    7. Government of Pakistan & World Bank Group & U.K. Department for International Development & European Union & Asian Development Bank, 2012. "Pakistan Federal Government," World Bank Publications - Reports 26816, The World Bank Group.
    8. Taco C. R. Someren & Shuhua Someren-Wang, 2012. "Green China Requires New Government," Management for Professionals, in: Green China, edition 127, chapter 7, pages 175-203, Springer.
    9. David F. J. Campbell & Elias G. Carayannis, 2012. "Governance: Governance of and in Higher Education," SpringerBriefs in Business, in: Epistemic Governance in Higher Education, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 13-60, Springer.
    10. Anna Whicher & Tom Crick, 2019. "Co-design, evaluation and the Northern Ireland Innovation Lab," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 290-299, May.
    11. 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, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    12. Burt, George & Mackay, David & Mendibil, Kepa, 2021. "Overcoming multi-stakeholder fragmented narratives in land use, woodland and forestry policy: The role scenario planning and ‘dissociative jolts’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    13. Huff, Emily S. & Floress, Kristin & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Ma, Zhao & Butler, Sarah, 2019. "Where farm and forest meet: Comparing National Woodland Owner Survey respondents with and without farmland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    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. 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).
    2. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    3. Ritten, Chian Jones & Nagler, Amy & Hansen, Kristiana M. & Bennett, Drew E. & Rashford, Benjamin S., 2022. "Incorporating Landowner Preferences into Successful Migratory Species Conservation Policy," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(1), May.
    4. Unknown, 2022. "Western Economics Forum: A Journal of the Western Agricultural Economics Association, v.20, Issue 1, Spring 2022," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(1), May.
    5. Mingyue Li & Jingjing Wang & Kai Chen & Lianbei Wu, 2020. "Willingness and Behaviors of Farmers’ Green Disposal of Pesticide Packaging Waste in Henan, China: A Perceived Value Formation Mechanism Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    7. Kumse, Kaittisak & Suzuki, Nobuhiro & Sato, Takeshi & Demont, Matty, 2021. "The spillover effect of direct competition between marketing cooperatives and private intermediaries: Evidence from the Thai rice value chain," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Alexandra Doernberg & Annette Piorr & Ingo Zasada & Dirk Wascher & Ulrich Schmutz, 2022. "Sustainability assessment of short food supply chains (SFSC): developing and testing a rapid assessment tool in one African and three European city regions," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 885-904, 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. Tiéfigué Pierrette Coulibaly & Jianguo Du & Daniel Diakité & Olivier Joseph Abban & Elvis Kouakou, 2021. "A Proposed Conceptual Framework on the Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices: The Role of Network Contact Frequency and Institutional Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    12. Jane Mills & Hannah Chiswell & Peter Gaskell & Paul Courtney & Beth Brockett & George Cusworth & Matt Lobley, 2021. "Developing Farm-Level Social Indicators for Agri-Environment Schemes: A Focus on the Agents of Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    13. Simpson, Katherine & Armsworth, Paul R. & Dallimer, Martin & Nthambi, Mary & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2023. "Improving the ecological and economic performance of agri-environment schemes: Payment by modelled results versus payment for actions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    14. Long, Hexing & de Jong, Wil & Yiwen, Zhang & Liu, Jinlong, 2021. "Institutional choices between private management and user group management during forest devolution: A case study of forest allocation in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Kearney, M. & O'Riordan, E.G. & Byrne, N. & Breen, J. & Crosson, P., 2023. "Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in pasture-based dairy-beef production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    16. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    17. Yanbing Wang & Niklas Möhring & Robert Finger, 2023. "When my neighbors matter: Spillover effects in the adoption of large‐scale pesticide‐free wheat production," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(2), pages 256-273, March.
    18. Lalani, Baqir & Aminpour, Payam & Gray, Steven & Williams, Meredith & Büchi, Lucie & Haggar, Jeremy & Grabowski, Philip & Dambiro, José, 2021. "Mapping farmer perceptions, Conservation Agriculture practices and on-farm measurements: The role of systems thinking in the process of adoption," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    19. Huber, Robert & Bartkowski, Bartosz & Brown, Calum & El Benni, Nadja & Feil, Jan-Henning & Grohmann, Pascal & Joormann, Ineke & Leonhardt, Heidi & Mitter, Hermine & Müller, Birgit, 2024. "Farm typologies for understanding farm systems and improving agricultural policy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    20. Sven Grüner & Mira Lehberger & Norbert Hirschauer & Oliver Mußhoff, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(3), pages 471-504, July.

    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:136:y:2024:i:c:s0264837723004404. 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.