2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.11.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the efficiency gains of improved spatial targeting of policy interventions; the example of an agri-environmental scheme

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Under the (Figure 4). This is consistent with relevant findings in the literature that identified benefit-cost targeting as the most efficient, or cost effective, targeting strategy to allocate limited agri-environmental subsidy funds (e.g., Van der Horst 2007;Crossman and Bryan 2009;Hansen et al 2015). For all targeting strategies, the average cost of TP removal increased with increases in the budget (Figure 4).…”
Section: Pond Establishment Under Targeting Strategiessupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Under the (Figure 4). This is consistent with relevant findings in the literature that identified benefit-cost targeting as the most efficient, or cost effective, targeting strategy to allocate limited agri-environmental subsidy funds (e.g., Van der Horst 2007;Crossman and Bryan 2009;Hansen et al 2015). For all targeting strategies, the average cost of TP removal increased with increases in the budget (Figure 4).…”
Section: Pond Establishment Under Targeting Strategiessupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Farmers' participation in AEMs is a basic requirement to achieve any environmental effect at all [5]. Increasing participation rates will specifically provide higher levels of environmental benefits (environmental effectiveness) if AEMs are targeted [8,[12][13][14][15]. Spatial targeting can be conducted at two levels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When simplistic assumptions are made on both those parameters, the heterogeneity of the spatial variation of benefits tends to be higher than the one of costs. In such cases benefit targeting tends to deliver better results than cost targeting (van der Horst, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%