IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v106y2021ics0264837721001642.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?

Author

Listed:
  • Clements, Jen
  • Lobley, Matt
  • Osborne, Juliet
  • Wills, Jane

Abstract

Agri-environment schemes were introduced in the UK in the 1980s as a response to the widespread environmental damage caused by post-war farming practices. Given such schemes are approaching forty years old, the academic literature is prolific and spans numerous fields including ecology, geography, economics and sociology. This paper reviews the existing literature on such schemes and discusses how it can contribute to benefit the explicit climate mitigation aims of more recent schemes. The focus is upon two key areas: the evaluation of environmental and social outcomes and recurring suggestions for innovation in these schemes. As schemes have been retrofitted to meet new climate aims over the years, moving on from a predominate focus on biodiversity loss, it is argued that academic research has an opportunity to contribute towards the co-design of schemes, with regards to mitigating climate change, especially in light of the key role land use will play in attaining negative emissions. Academic research can inform the development of a new generation of schemes that prioritise carbon sequestration and emission reduction, alongside more traditional biodiversity aims.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:106:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721001642
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721001642
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105441?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. Toderi, Marco & Francioni, Matteo & Seddaiu, Giovanna & Roggero, Pier Paolo & Trozzo, Laura & D’Ottavio, Paride, 2017. "Bottom-up design process of agri-environmental measures at a landscape scale: Evidence from case studies on biodiversity conservation and water protection," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 295-305.
    2. Franks, J.R. & Emery, S.B. & Whittingham, M.J. & McKenzie, A.J., 2016. "Farmer attitudes to cross-holding agri-environment schemes and their implications for Countryside Stewardship," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 5(4), December.
    3. J. R. Franks & A. McGloin, 2007. "Joint submissions, output related payments and environmental co-operatives: Can the Dutch experience innovate UK agri-environment policy?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 233-256.
    4. 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.
    5. Robert Macfarlane, 1998. "Implementing Agri-environment Policy: A Landscape Ecology Perspective," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(5), pages 575-596.
    6. Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Polard, Audrey & Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo, 2015. "The role of network bridging organisations in compensation payments for agri-environmental services under the EU Common Agricultural Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 24-38.
    7. 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.
    8. David Kleijn & Frank Berendse & Ruben Smit & Niels Gilissen, 2001. "Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes," Nature, Nature, vol. 413(6857), pages 723-725, October.
    9. Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Polard, Audrey & Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo, 2015. "The role of network bridging organisations in compensation payments for agri-environmental services under the EU Common Agricultural Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 24-38.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Pacini, G. Cesare & Merante, Paolo & Lazzerini, Giulio & Van Passel, Steven, 2015. "Increasing the cost-effectiveness of EU agri-environment policy measures through evaluation of farm and field-level environmental and economic performance," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 70-78.
    13. Steven Emery, 2015. "Independence and individualism: conflated values in farmer cooperation?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 47-61, March.
    14. Jeremy Franks, 2011. "The collective provision of environmental goods: a discussion of contractual issues," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(5), pages 637-660.
    15. Vesterager, J.P. & Frederiksen, P. & Kristensen, S.B.P. & Vadineanu, A. & Gaube, V. & Geamana, N.A. & Pavlis, V. & Terkenli, T.S. & Bucur, M.M. & van der Sluis, T. & Busck, A.G., 2016. "Dynamics in national agri-environmental policy implementation under changing EU policy priorities: Does one size fit all?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 764-776.
    16. Emily Cox & Elspeth Spence & Nick Pidgeon, 2020. "Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(8), pages 744-749, August.
    17. Herzon, I. & Birge, T. & Allen, B. & Povellato, A. & Vanni, F. & Hart, K. & Radley, G. & Tucker, G. & Keenleyside, C. & Oppermann, R. & Underwood, E. & Poux, X. & Beaufoy, G. & Pražan, J., 2018. "Time to look for evidence: Results-based approach to biodiversity conservation on farmland in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 347-354.
    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. 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).

    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. Prager, Katrin, 2022. "Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. Matteo Olivieri & Maria Andreoli & Daniele Vergamini & Fabio Bartolini, 2021. "Innovative Contract Solutions for the Provision of Agri-Environmental Climatic Public Goods: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Darnhofer, Ika & Schermer, Markus & Steinbacher, Melanie & Gabillet, Marine & Daugstad, Karoline, 2017. "Preserving permanent mountain grasslands in Western Europe: Why are promising approaches not implemented more widely?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 306-315.
    7. Nilsson, Lovisa & Clough, Yann & Smith, Henrik G. & Alkan Olsson, Johanna & Brady, Mark V. & Hristov, Jordan & Olsson, Peter & Skantze, Karin & Ståhlberg, David & Dänhardt, Juliana, 2019. "A suboptimal array of options erodes the value of CAP ecological focus areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 407-418.
    8. Häfner, Kati & Piorr, Annette, 2021. "Farmers’ perception of co-ordinating institutions in agri-environmental measures – The example of peatland management for the provision of public goods on a landscape scale," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Kelemen, Eszter & Megyesi, Boldizsár & Matzdorf, Bettina & Andersen, Erling & van Bussel, Lenny G.J. & Dumortier, Myriam & Dutilly, Céline & García-Llorente, Marina & Hamon, Christine & LePage, Annabe, 2023. "The prospects of innovative agri-environmental contracts in the European policy context: Results from a Delphi study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(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. 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).
    13. 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).
    14. Chaplin, S.P. & Mills, J. & Chiswell, H., 2021. "Developing payment-by-results approaches for agri-environment schemes: Experience from an arable trial in England," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    15. Brown, Calum & Kovács, Eszter & Herzon, Irina & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Albizua, Amaia & Galanaki, Antonia & Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & McCracken, Davy & Olsson, Johanna Alkan & Zinngrebe, Yves, 2021. "Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    16. Baur, Ivo & Schläpfer, Felix, 2018. "Expert Estimates of the Share of Agricultural Support that Compensates European Farmers for Providing Public Goods and Services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 264-275.
    17. Kampelmann, Stephan & Van Hollebeke, Sarah & Vandergert, Paula, 2016. "Stuck in the middle with you: The role of bridging organisations in urban regeneration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 82-93.
    18. Wiśniewski, Łukasz & Rudnicki, Roman & Chodkowska-Miszczuk, Justyna, 2021. "What non-natural factors are behind the underuse of EU CAP funds in areas with valuable habitats?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    19. Paolo Melindi-Ghidi & Tom Dedeurwaerdere & Giorgio Fabbri, 2017. "Building Bridges for the Adoption of Deep Green Agri-environment Measures: The Emergence of Environmental Knowledge Brokers," EconomiX Working Papers 2017-48, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    20. 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).

    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:106:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721001642. 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.