Farmer collectives for more effective agri-environmental schemes? An assessment framework based on the concept of ‘professionalization’

Abstract

Agri-environmental schemes (AESs) have been implemented in many countries in Europe. However, there is mixed evidence about their effectiveness. Several studies in different countries suggest that AESs are more effective when designed at landscape level and implemented by groups of collaborating farmers ('farmer collectives'). The EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has enabled groups of farmers to be applicants for and final beneficiaries of AESs subsidies for the period 2015-2020, but it is unclear what is needed for farmer collectives engaged in AESs to contribute to more agrobiodiversity. In this paper, the lens of 'professionalization' is used to conceptualize and operationalize the performance of farmer collectives. We have developed an assessment framework that facilitates the characterization and development of the degree of professionalization of farmer collectives. The ultimate aim is achieving ecological effectiveness of AESs by professionalization of the farmer collectives. The framework distinguishes three categories of professionalization: organizational, occupational and systemic, and provides a new lens for research on AESs. It can also be used by practitioners involved in AESs to provide insight into, and reflect upon, the performance of farmer collectives.

Working with or against multifunctional landscapes? A case study of land users’ local knowledge of grassland–forest transition zones in northeastern Germany

“…Such top-down policies and schemes have therefore not been particularly successful in fostering actor-led landscape management that enhances the provision of multiple functions or services. This result can partly be explained by the unidirectional and siloed flow of information or knowledge upon which most current agri-environmental schemes are based (Leventon et al 2017, Recanati et al 2019, Dik et al 2022) Many authors, therefore, highlight the need to integrate different forms of knowledge that are put into action by local decision-makers, including farmers (Kloppenburg 1991, Raymond et al 2010, Brunet et al 2018).…”

More than spatial coordination – How Dutch agricultural collectives foster social capital for effective governance of agri-environmental measures

“…It is organized around farmer-based organizations which facilitate the coordination of measures. Most importantly, this approach emphasizes social reasons for cooperation at a landscape level (de Vries et al, 2019): involvement of stakeholders for allocation of resources and knowledge (Dik et al, 2021); farmers' ability as a group to participate in decision-making beyond farm-scale for creating ownership (Mills et al, 2011;Emery and Franks, 2012); and social learning, e. g. in farmer meetings, for creating commitment of farmers for agri-environmental management (Mills et al, 2011;Dooley, 2020;Westerink et al, 2021). While similar regional initiatives to involve farmer organizations in collective AECM occur also in other countries such as Belgium or United Kingdom (e.g.…”

A club model of nature‐smart agriculture for biodiversity, climate, and productivity enhancements

“…The agri‐environmental measures and tools (e.g., agri‐environmental schemes [AES] in Europe and elsewhere globally) for sustainable agriculture management focus mainly on in‐farm biodiversity conservation rather than the broader landscape attributes. Various studies demonstrated mixed evidence of the effectiveness of AES in conserving in situ agrobiodiversity and ex situ broader biodiversity (Batáry et al, 2015; Dik et al, 2021). Nevertheless, their effectiveness in addressing all the food security issues is limited given that conventional intensive agriculture is unsustainable and any isolated conservation activities cannot mitigate its adversity.…”

“…Nevertheless, their effectiveness in addressing all the food security issues is limited given that conventional intensive agriculture is unsustainable and any isolated conservation activities cannot mitigate its adversity. Hence, there is a growing interest in finding comprehensive approaches to address these issues at the landscape or ecosystem level to ensure sustainable food security and address the adverse effects of agriculture on biodiversity and the climate (Apitz, 2013; Dik et al, 2021; Shahmohamadloo et al, 2021; Wenning and Apitz, 2012).…”