Environmental policy integration (EPI), that is, the incorporation of environmental concerns in non‐environmental policy areas, has been widely adopted in public policies. However, EPI research has found much discrepancy between environmental objectives and actual implementation. This paper argues that analyzing EPI in the context of policy mixes with multiple objectives, multiple instruments and their calibrations helps to better understand unavoidable tensions and limitations. We develop a framework to assess EPI at these three levels of policy output, synthesizing the EPI and policy mix literatures. We further distinguish four analytical dimensions to assess calibrations: stringency, specificity, flexibility, and temporality. A case study of the national implementation of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in Germany 2014–2022 is used to elaborate the conceptual argument. The CAP has saliently incorporated environmental objectives, while implementation, including the calibrations of most instruments within predetermined corridors, is left to member states. A systematic meta‐review of 142 texts evaluating policy instruments and calibrations in the CAP 2014–2022, focusing on Germany, found that several CAP instruments link most farm income support to pro‐environmental behavior. These instruments could potentially have high environmental effectiveness and efficiency. But actual policy calibrations delivered weak EPI due to low stringency and specificity, while high flexibility and temporal accommodation of farmers' needs might support EPI by increasing acceptance. Weak EPI resulted from instrument calibrations in the face of unavoidable trade‐offs between competing objectives. Our results demonstrate that calibrations can significantly affect the strength of EPI adoption, and the priorities within policy mixes more generally.

Value chains that generate an increased willingness to pay among consumers by offering enhanced levels of sustainability are widely discussed as an important strategy for creating new business opportunities and fostering food system transformation. Previous research has highlighted the importance of governance arrangements to secure the trust necessary for the establishment of sustainability-based value chains. However, how different coordination designs by private and public actors along the value chain affect trust formation is not well understood. To address this question, this paper combines the concepts of hybrid governance and multidimensional trust to guide a comparative analysis of five sustainability-based agri-food value chains in Germany as exemplary case studies. The findings show that different types of governance activities are necessary to build the capacity to address four different sources of trust: dispositional, affinitive, rational and procedural trust. Building trust capacities facilitates coordination of activities along the value chain and reliable delivery of sustainability-related value propositions. In all five cases, governance arrangements and building of trust capacities were geared towards increasing willingness to pay. Sustainability-based agri-food value chains have therefore limited potential to internalize the agri-food sector’s substantial negative externalities.

No abstract

Fast die Hälfte der Fläche der EU wird landwirtschaftlich genutzt. Daraus ergeben sich vielfältigeWechselwirkungen zwischen Landwirtschaft und Umwelt. Die EU‑Agrarpolitik hat großen Einfluss auf die Nutzung der Flächen, trägt bislang jedoch wenig dazu bei, negative Umweltwirkungen zu vermindern. Mit dem richtigen Policy-Mix könnte sich dies zukünftig ändern.