IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v119y2022ics0264837722002095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Prager, Katrin

Abstract

In policy and academic literature, landscape-scale agri-environment schemes (AES) are discussed in conjunction with farmer collaboration, reflecting the assumption that the two concepts are synergistic. However, farmers cooperate in different ways and for different purposes, with agri-environmental collaboration representing a different, more unique, case in relation to cooperation. Collective action among farmers may occur as cooperation (often facilitated by a third party) or as direct collaboration between farmers. Farmers’ general willingness to cooperate should not be conflated with collaboration under the demands and constraints of a landscape-scale AES. This paper investigated the Countryside Stewardship Facilitation Fund (CSFF) in England as a policy intervention to develop cooperation amongst farmers and agree the agri-environmental management priorities that they plan to take forward across their holdings. Data from empirical research on the actual operation of six CSFF-funded groups in Cumbria and East Anglia was analysed from a social capital and collective action perspective. We found that key elements of social capital (connectedness, trust, norms) differed between cases, leading to different starting points for establishing groups. The resulting cooperation in agri-environmental management also varied depending on pre-existing networks. The CSFF supported steps to increase the capacity of individuals (and in some cases groups) to deliver agri-environmental outcomes via a facilitator, but struggled to create self-sustaining groups of farmers collaborating on agri-environmental management. The design of similar policy interventions needs to be explicit what kind of farmer cooperation is aimed for. It also needs to take into account the time required for building the prerequisite social capital, tensions between priorities of farmer-led groups and state-funded AES, and trade-offs between group cohesion and landscape-scale working.

Suggested Citation

  • Prager, Katrin, 2022. "Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:119:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722002095
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106182
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722002095
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106182?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. 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.
    2. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Sarah Schomers & Bettina Matzdorf & Claas Meyer & Claudia Sattler, 2015. "How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-31, October.
    5. Veland Ramadani & Esra Memili & Ramo Palalić & Erick P. C. Chang, 2020. "Governance in the Family Businesses," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, in: Entrepreneurial Family Businesses, chapter 2, pages 29-41, Springer.
    6. Jasper R. de Vries & Eva van der Zee & Raoul Beunen & Rianne Kat & Peter H. Feindt, 2019. "Trusting the People and the System. The Interrelation Between Interpersonal and Institutional Trust in Collective Action for Agri-Environmental Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    7. Jos Bijman & Markus Hanisch & Ger Sangen, 2014. "Shifting Control? The Change of Internal Governance in Agricultural Cooperatives in the EU," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(4), pages 641-661, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Darcy W.E. Allen, 2020. "Governing Entrepreneurial Discovery," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: WHEN ENTREPRENEURS MEET The Collective Governance of New Ideas, chapter 1, pages 1-13, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Eliska Drapalova & Kai Wegrich, 2020. "Who governs 4.0? Varieties of smart cities," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 668-686, May.
    13. Agnes C. S. Cheng & Wenli Huang & Shaojun Zhang, 2020. "Major government customer and management earnings forecasts," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Oecd, 2020. "Infrastructure Governance Review of Argentina," OECD Journal on Budgeting, OECD Publishing, vol. 20(1).
    15. Mills, Jane & Gaskell, Peter & Ingram, Julie & Chaplin, Stephen, 2018. "Understanding farmers’ motivations for providing unsubsidised environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 697-707.
    16. ., 2020. "Raising government revenue," Chapters, in: Rethinking Wealth and Taxes, chapter 2, pages 52-76, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. Broadmeadow, Samantha & Nisbet, Tom & Palmer, Robert & Webb, Louise & Short, Chris & Chivers, Charlotte-Anne & Hammond, John & Lukac, Martin & Miller, Anne & Gantlett, Richard & Clark, Joanna, 2023. "Incorporating technical and farmer knowledge to improve land use and management for natural flood management in lowland catchments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    2. Image, Mike & Gardner, Emma & Breeze, Tom D., 2023. "Co-benefits from tree planting in a typical English agricultural landscape: Comparing the relative effectiveness of hedgerows, agroforestry and woodland creation for improving crop pollination service," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Eichhorn, Theresa & Schaller, Lena & Hamunen, Katri & Runge, Tania, 2024. "Exploring macro-environmental factors influencing adoption of result-based and collective agri-environmental measures: a PESTLE approach based on stakeholder statements," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 13(01), May.

    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. 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).
    2. Pivetta, D. & Dall’Armi, C. & Sandrin, P. & Bogar, M. & Taccani, R., 2024. "The role of hydrogen as enabler of industrial port area decarbonization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PB).
    3. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer & Wood, Geoffrey & Knight, Gary, 2021. "COVID-19 and digitalization: The great acceleration," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 602-611.
    4. Daniela Kletzan-Slamanig & Franz Sinabell, 2021. "Der Beitrag der Konjunkturbelebung zur Transformation. Einordnung von Maßnahmen der Bundesländer," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(1), pages 67-78, January.
    5. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    6. Wifo, 2021. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 1/2021," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(1), January.
    7. Castonguay, Alexandre & Wagner, Gerit & Motulsky, Aude & Paré, Guy, 2024. "AI maturity in health care: An overview of 10 OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    8. 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.
    9. Mohd Hilal Muhammad & Ahmad Afif Ahmarofi & Mohd Zhafri Mohd Zukhi & Muhammad Khairul Zharif Nor A’zam & Muhammad Hanif Othman, 2024. "Internet Exchange: A Catalyst for Digital Economy Towards AI-Driven Governance (Govtech)," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(9), pages 1961-1972, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Allen, Darcy W.E. & Berg, Chris & Lane, Aaron M., 2023. "Why airdrop cryptocurrency tokens?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    12. da Silva Medina, Gabriel & Pokorny, Benno, 2022. "Agro-industrial development: Lessons from Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. Thomas, Emma & Riley, Mark & Spees, Jack, 2020. "Knowledge flows: Farmers’ social relations and knowledge sharing practices in ‘Catchment Sensitive Farming’," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. Bethwell, Claudia & Sattler, Claudia & Stachow, Ulrich, 2022. "An analytical framework to link governance, agricultural production practices, and the provision of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    15. Chintapalli, Prashant & Tang, Christopher S., 2022. "The implications of crop minimum support price in the presence of myopic and strategic farmers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(1), pages 336-349.
    16. 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).
    17. Daniel Kpienbaareh & Rachel Bezner Kerr & Isaac Luginaah & Jinfei Wang & Esther Lupafya & Laifolo Dakishoni & Lizzie Shumba, 2020. "Spatial and Ecological Farmer Knowledge and Decision-Making about Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, September.
    18. Sergio Currarini & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandro Tavoni, 2016. "Network Economics and the Environment: Insights and Perspectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 159-189, September.
    19. Crespo, Joan & Réquier-Desjardins, Denis & Vicente, Jérôme, 2014. "Why can collective action fail in Local Agri-food Systems? A social network analysis of cheese producers in Aculco, Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 165-177.
    20. Arsovski Slobodan & Kwiatkowski Michał & Lewandowska Aleksandra & Peshevska Dimitrinka Jordanova & Sofeska Emilija & Dymitrow Mirek, 2018. "Can urban environmental problems be overcome? The case of Skopje–world’s most polluted city," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 40(40), pages 17-39, June.

    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:119:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722002095. 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.