IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae14/186379.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Farmer groups as a device to ensure the provision of green services in the Netherlands: a political economy perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Jongeneel, Roel
  • Pollman, Nico

Abstract

The latest reform of the CAP, CAP towards 2020, opens up the possibility to arrange agri-environmental service provision via contracting groups of farmers, rather than contracting individual farmers. The Dutch government decided to fully switch to a farmer group service provision system in 2016. The paper analyses the new organisational framework that now is derived and links it to the Dutch tradition of environmental cooperatives. Issues of collective action, transaction costs, information problems, effectiveness, accountability, and procurement efficiency are analysed in a qualitative way. It is concluded that the Dutch model is promising, although not without risks. Its implementation path seems properly chosen. However, in order to fully reap the benefits possible under the new system one need to reduce restrictions and increase incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Jongeneel, Roel & Pollman, Nico, 2014. "Farmer groups as a device to ensure the provision of green services in the Netherlands: a political economy perspective," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 186379, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae14:186379
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.186379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/186379/files/Farmer%20groups%20as%20a%20device%20for%20the%20provisioning%20of%20green%20services%20_EAAE-Jongeneel-Polman%20August%202014%20final_.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.186379?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    2. Tadelis, Steven, 2012. "Public procurement design: Lessons from the private sector," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 297-302.
    3. Ian Hodge, 2007. "The Governance of Rural Land in a Liberalised World," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 409-432, September.
    4. Shelanski, Howard A & Klein, Peter G, 1995. "Empirical Research in Transaction Cost Economics: A Review and Assessment," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 335-361, October.
    5. Patrick Bajari & Stephanie Houghton & Steven Tadelis, 2014. "Bidding for Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis of Adaptation Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1288-1319, April.
    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. Westerink, Judith & Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & Prager, Katrin & Franks, Jeremy & Dupraz, Pierre & Mettepenningen, Evy, 2017. "Collaborative governance arrangements to deliver spatially coordinated agri-environmental management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 176-192.

    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. Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico, 2014. "Farmer groups as a device to ensure the provision of green services in the Netherlands: a political economy perspective," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 186674, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Dakshina G. De Silva & Timothy Dunne & Georgia Kosmopoulou & Carlos Lamarche, 2015. "Project modifications and bidding in highway procurement auctions," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2015-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    3. Miguel Vazquez & Michelle Hallack, 2017. "Efficiency versus transaction costs in multidimensional auctions: the case of Brazilian oil and gas lease auctions," IEFE Working Papers 94, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    4. Ram Singh, 2018. "Public–private partnerships vs. traditional contracts for highways," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 29-63, December.
    5. Patrick L. Warren, 2014. "Contracting officer workload, incomplete contracting, and contractual terms," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 395-421, June.
    6. Ranjani Krishnan & Deepa Mani, 2020. "Uncertainty and Compensation Design in Strategic Interfirm Contracts†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 542-574, March.
    7. He, Chusu & Milne, Alistair & Ataullah, Ali, 2023. "What explains delays in public procurement decisions?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    8. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2008. "How Does Outsourcing Affect Performance Dynamics? Evidence from the Automobile Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 1963-1979, December.
    9. Hermano, Víctor & Martín-Cruz, Natalia, 2013. "How to Deliver Foreign Aid? The Case of Projects Governed by the Spanish International Agency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 298-314.
    10. Rodrigo Carril & Andres Gonzalez-Lira & Michael S. Walker, 2022. "Competition under Incomplete Contracts and the Design of Procurement Policies," Working Papers 1327, Barcelona School of Economics.
    11. Engel, Eduardo & Fischer, Ronald D. & Galetovic, Alexander, 2024. "The company you keep: Renegotiations and adverse selection in transportation infrastructure," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    12. Daniel Prudencio, 2023. "Productivity in Procurement Auctions of Pavement Contracts in Mexico," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 63-85, August.
    13. Feng, Zhuo & Zhang, Yiwen & Zhang, Shuibo & Song, Jinbo, 2018. "Contracting and renegotiating with a loss-averse private firm in BOT road projects," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 40-72.
    14. Williamson, Oliver, 2009. "The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 111-134, December.
    15. Phalippou, Ludovic & Rauch, Christian & Umber, Marc, 2018. "Private equity portfolio company fees," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 559-585.
    16. Rodrigo Carril, 2021. "Rules Versus Discretion in Public Procurement," Working Papers 1232, Barcelona School of Economics.
    17. Nicholas Ryan, 2020. "Contract Enforcement and Productive Efficiency: Evidence From the Bidding and Renegotiation of Power Contracts in India," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 383-424, March.
    18. Mikko Ketokivi & Joseph T. Mahoney, 2020. "Transaction Cost Economics As a Theory of Supply Chain Efficiency," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(4), pages 1011-1031, April.
    19. Fabian Herweg & Marco A. Schwarz, 2016. "Optimal Cost Overruns: Procurement Auctions and Renegotiation," CESifo Working Paper Series 5838, CESifo.
    20. Herweg, Fabian & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2014. "Auctions vs. Negotiations:The Effects of Inefficient Renegotiation," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 484, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy; Political Economy;
    All these keywords.

    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:eaae14:186379. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.