The use of socio‐economic and environmental indicators in assessing the effectiveness of EU agri‐environmental policy

Abstract

Since the mid‐1980s, ‘indicators’ have been increasingly suggested as a possible means to evaluate the effectiveness of various policy mechanisms. In this paper, we shed some critical light on the use of indicators, by investigating in detail the advantages and disadvantages of using the indicator approach in the assessment of agri‐environmental policy effectiveness in the European Union. We review the theoretical and conceptual bases of the indicator approach, highlighting the complexity of identifying appropriate indicators and the difficulties in identifying means to ‘measure’ them. We analyse four levels of indicators (uptake, output, actor‐related and procedural indicators), and argue that, while indicators continue to have a central role to play in the evaluation of European agri‐environmental policy, that role is essentially limited and the notion of what constitutes an indicator needs to be thoroughly re‐examined. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Mobilisation capacity for agri-environmental management

“…Mobilisation, then, is all about creating synergies by using and maximising the opportunities available, rather than achieving a pre-formulated goal. Note that the stated objectives of AEM are multiple and by no means restricted to a single policy agenda (see Wilson and Buller, 2001, for a similar remark), but it is just because of this that AEM can fluidly be adapted to other contexts. In this respect, evaluation should not focus only on intentions and objectives but instead address the opportunities for synergies themselves.…”

Opportunities and Barriers for Water Co-Governance—A Critical Analysis of Seven Cases of Diffuse Water Pollution from Agriculture in Europe, Australia and North America

“…This included the specification of indicators of effective co-governance. The use of such indicators can help to simplify and describe the case and communicate the findings in a detailed and structured way [32].…”

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

“…Evaluation criteria are operationalized through instruments (such as interviews, questionnaires and observation) and performance indicators. Indicators are used to simplify and describe a situation and assist in communicating evaluation findings [Wilson and Buller, 2001]. They need to be measurable, usable, sufficiently detailed and structured so that they can be applied in multiple settings and on multiple occasions, they should be reliable (consistent through time and space) and should accurately reflect reality [Leach et al, 2002;Rowe and Frewer, 2004;Stufflebeam and Shinkfield, 2007;Wilson and Buller, 2001].…”