Making Bird Numbers Count: Should Dutch Meadow Bird Conservation Schemes Become Result-Based?

Thiermann, Insa; Silvius, Brechtje; Splinter, Melody; Dries, Liesbeth

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4379902

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, limited applied DCE research includes precise results‐based payments in their frameworks. In a few cases, these payments have involved predefined biodiversity targets expressed in species abundance (Sorice et al., 2011; Tanaka et al., 2022; Thiermann et al., 2023), yield projections (Waldman et al., 2017), success of tree‐planting activities (Schaafsma et al., 2019) or water quality improvements (Niskanen et al., 2021). There is abundant room for further progress in determining how farmers compare practice‐ and result‐based programmes once they truly have the option to select between the two.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…DCE studies conducted in Europe looked at needed per hectare compensation payments for percentage dose reductions in fertiliser applications in the UK (Beharry‐Borg et al., 2013), Denmark (Christensen et al., 2011), Belgium (Lizin et al., 2015) and France (Vaissière et al., 2018), eliciting compensation payments ranging from 85 to 130 euro/ha/year, depending on the intensity of reduction (see Table 1 for more detail). Moreover, a complete ban on fertiliser and pesticide use has been investigated in the Netherlands, leading to needed compensation payments above 670 euro/ha (Thiermann et al., 2023). With regard to organic alternatives, German farmers largely preferred the option of ‘mineral and organic fertilisation allowed’ over ‘no fertilisation’ or ‘organic fertilisation allowed’ (Latacz‐Lohmann & Breustedt, 2019).…”

Section: Stated Preference‐based Evidence For Agri‐environmental Poli...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies provided options, such as self‐monitoring or external monitoring (Canessa et al., 2023; Greiner, 2016; Thiermann et al., 2023) and regular or irregular control (Li et al., 2017), or even provided options regarding the monitoring agency (Kreye et al., 2017). Self‐ and non‐governmental monitoring seemed to positively affect farmers' choices regarding programme enrolment (Canessa et al., 2023; Thiermann et al., 2023).…”

Section: Stated Preference‐based Evidence For Agri‐environmental Poli...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review

Schulze,

Zagórska,

Häfner

et al. 2023

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring that farmers' ex ante preferences are accounted for is crucial for the design of effective agri‐environmental contracts. We present a systematic review of 127 discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies of farmers' preferences with respect to agri‐environmental contracts. DCE studies evaluate two central features of farmers' behaviour: (1) their willingness to accept land use prescriptions, such as fertiliser use, application of pesticides, restrictions on cropping, livestock management, integration of silvopasture, maintaining soil health or water use restrictions; and (2) their responses to variations in incentive and commitment criteria, such as reward schemes, monitoring regimes, technical assistance, flexibility of agreements, administrative burden and collaborative implementation. Our analysis considers how these different elements are interlinked and applied in experiments to simulate farmers' decision‐making processes. We examine recent methodological improvements in explaining farmer behaviour, including the accommodation of preference heterogeneity, the combining of discrete (enrolment) and continuous decisions, and the incorporation of farmers' sense of identity. DCEs have been applied for the ex ante analysis of different policy instruments to inform the European Common Agricultural Policy and agri‐environmental schemes outside the EU. The results of this systematic review may be useful in informing the future design of such agri‐environmental programmes. The database underpinning this systematic literature review may help peer scientists to (a) compare, validate and triangulate their own findings with respect to other experimental approaches, (b) use previous willingness‐to‐accept (WTA) measures as priors for their own study design, and (c) identify research gaps regarding farmers' preferences for agri‐environmental measures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stated Preference‐based Evidence For Agri‐environmental Poli...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stated Preference‐based Evidence For Agri‐environmental Poli...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review

Schulze,

Zagórska,

Häfner

et al. 2023

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Making Bird Numbers Count: Should Dutch Meadow Bird Conservation Schemes Become Result-Based?

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review

Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About