Joint submissions,output related payments and environmental co-operatives: Can the Dutch experience innovate UK agri-environment policy?

This paper describes three relatively recent innovations in the Dutch agri-environment programme which have helped nature management to be contiguous with natural features allowing the landscape to be managed whole rather than piecemeal—and thus generate higher quality and greater scope in environmental management. The first two, joint submissions by neighbouring farmers and payments related to the level of environmental output delivered, are scheme innovations. The third, Environmental Co-operatives (EC)—clubs of neighbouring farmers that inter alia co-ordinate and help manage the scheme innovations—is an institutional innovation. None has an equivalent in the UK. Evidence from interviews with farmer and non-farmer members, policy makers, academics and other interested parties show the role EC play in overcoming some of the postulated problems of the two scheme innovations. Not all the problems have been overcome, and cost-benefit analyses have not been conducted, nevertheless there is sufficient evidence to suggest that these innovations have benefited all actors involved: farmers, the government, the environment and the rural economy. Analysis of UK agri-environment policy using actor network theory (ANT) suggests the UK government will need to show similar levels of trust in and commitment to the farming community before these innovations could be introduced in the UK.     

Review of Agri-Environment Indexes and Stewardship Payments

Agri-environment programs aim to secure environmental and social stewardship services through payments to farmers. A critical component of many agri-environment programs is an agri-environment index (AEI) used to quantify benefits and target investments. An AEI will typically comprise multiple indicators, which are weighted and combined using a utility function, to measure the benefit of investment options (e.g., projects, farms, regions). This article presents a review of AEIs with 11 case studies from agri-environment programs in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. We identify a generic procedure used to define AEIs and explore the implications of alternative methodological approaches. We conclude that AEIs have become an extremely important policy instrument and make suggestions for their improvement.     

Revised Agri-environment Policy Objectives: Implications for Scheme Design

The new objectives for agri-environment policy recommended by the Policy Commission for the Future of Food and Farming are reviewed and proposals to achieve them are assessed. The Commission proposes a unified scheme, with a 'broad and shallow' tier that would incorporate a whole-farm environmental plan and audit. Participation at this level would be a prerequisite for entry into higher tiers focused on securing regional and national ecological, landscape and bio-diversity priorities. However, the Commission recognizes that further resource protection measures need to be developed to substantiate its design, particularly to enable the delivery of 'wider bio-diversity and landscape benefits'. Innovations in addition to those recommended by the Policy Commission are advocated here. These include adding Cultural options and a two-option Enhanced Level tier. The specifications of the first Enhanced Level option would be based on each farm's Sustainability Index Score. The second option would overcome the 'economics of configuration' problem by encouraging farmers to co-operate to deliver environmental outputs as members of 'environmental clubs'. The possibility of using web-based technology to increase the transparency of agri-environmental payments is also discussed. The design proposed here streamlines, simplifies and increases the efficiency of the existing agri-environment schemes.     

Indicators of Biodiversity and Conservational Wildlife Quality on Danish Organic Farms for Use in Farm Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Indicator Development and Testing

Organic farming is expected to contribute to conserving national biodiversity on farms, especially remnant, old, and undisturbed small biotopes, forests, and permanent grassland. This objective cannot rely on the legislation of organic farming solely, and to succeed, farmers need to understand the goals behind it. A set of indicators with the purpose of facilitating dialogues between expert and farmer on wildlife quality has been developed and tested on eight organic farms. “Weed cover in cereal fields,” was used as an indicator of floral and faunal biodiversity in the cultivated land, and “uncultivated biotope area” on the farm was used as a general measure of wildlife habitats. Functional grouping of herbaceous plants (discriminating between “high conservation value” plant species and “competitive”/“ruderal” species) and low mobility butterflies were used as indicators of conservation value, especially focusing on the few sites left with considerable remnant conservation value. The dialog processes revealed that the organic farmers’ ideas and goals of conservation of wildlife quality were not necessarily the same as for biologists; the farmers expressed very different opinions on the biological rooted idea, that wildlife quality is related to the absence of agricultural impact. However, farmers also stated that the information given by the indicators and especially the dialogue with the biologist had influenced their perception and awareness of wildlife. We conclude that, combined with a dialogue process, using these indicators when mapping wildlife quality could be an important key component of a farm wildlife management advisory tool at farm level.     

Comparison of Two Spatial Optimization Techniques: A Framework to Solve Multiobjective Land Use Distribution Problems

Two spatial optimization approaches, developed from the opposing perspectives of ecological economics and landscape planning and aimed at the definition of new distributions of farming systems and of land use elements, are compared and integrated into a general framework. The first approach, applied to a small river catchment in southwestern France, uses SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) and a weighted goal programming model in combination with a geographical information system (GIS) for the determination of optimal farming system patterns, based on selected objective functions to minimize deviations from the goals of reducing nitrogen and maintaining income. The second approach, demonstrated in a suburban landscape near Leipzig, Germany, defines a GIS-based predictive habitat model for the search of unfragmented regions suitable for hare populations (Lepus europaeus), followed by compromise optimization with the aim of planning a new habitat structure distribution for the hare. The multifunctional problem is solved by the integration of the three landscape functions (“production of cereals,” “resistance to soil erosion by water,” and “landscape water retention”). Through the comparison, we propose a framework for the definition of optimal land use patterns based on optimization techniques. The framework includes the main aspects to solve land use distribution problems with the aim of finding the optimal or best land use decisions. It integrates indicators, goals of spatial developments and stakeholders, including weighting, and model tools for the prediction of objective functions and risk assessments. Methodological limits of the uncertainty of data and model outcomes are stressed. The framework clarifies the use of optimization techniques in spatial planning.     

Scale and self-governance in agri-environment schemes: experiences with two alternative approaches in the Netherlands

Agri-environment schemes in the Netherlands have been criticized for their lack of effectiveness. Explanations were sought in the limited size of the individual farm and in the shallowness of the measures. We distinguish three scale problems: in the spatial dimension (from farm element to landscape), in the management dimension (from add-on measure to farming system) and in the governance dimension (from little to much space for self-governance by farmers). These scale concepts are used to translate insights from ecology and agro-economy to governance approaches. We analyse case studies of two new approaches: an area approach with group contracts and spatial coordination of agri-environmental measures, and a farming system with substantial adaptations of the farming concept. Both approaches have elements of increased self-governance and could offer inspiration for schemes elsewhere. We propose that appropriate space for self-governance is necessary when choosing another scale approach for making agri-environment schemes more effective.     

Food: From Commodity to Commons

Our food and farming system is not socially, economically or ecologically sustainable. Many of the ills are a result of market competition driving specialization and linear production models, externalizing costs for environmental, social and cultural degradation. Some propose that market mechanisms should be used to correct this; improved consumer choice, internalization of costs and compensation to farmers for public goods. What we eat is determined by the path taken by our ancestors, by commercialization and fierce competition, fossil fuels and demographic development. Based on those, governments and the food industry are the choice architects who determine what we eat; consumer choice plays a marginal role. Using market mechanisms to internalize cost and compensate farmers for public goods has been proposed for decades but little progress has been made. There are also many practical, ethical and theoretical objections to such a system. The market is not a good master for a sustainable food system. Instead we need to find new ways of managing the food system based on food as a right and farming as a management system of the planet Earth. The solutions should be based on relocalization of food production and de-commodification of food and our symbionts, the plants and animals we eat.     

Nature and Nature Values in Organic Agriculture. An Analysis of Contested Concepts and Values Among Different Actors in Organic Farming

The relationship between agriculture and nature is a central issue in the current agricultural debate. Organic Farming has ambitions and a special potential in relation to nature. Consideration for nature is part of the guiding principals of organic farming and many organic farmers are committed to protecting natural qualities. However, the issue of nature, landscape, and land use is not straightforward. Nature is an ambiguous concept that involves multiple interests and actors reaching far beyond farmers. The Danish research project Nature Quality in Organic Farming has investigated the relationship between nature and organic farming. This article will focus on an expert workshop held in connection with the project that investigates the way different actors conceptualize nature. Farmers, scientists, and non-governmental organizations came together to discuss their experiences of nature and expectations of organic agriculture. From this interaction, it was clear that nature is a contested notion. Different understandings of nature exist within the three groups and there is disagreement as to whether emphasis should be given to biological qualities, production values, or experiential and aesthetic perspectives. This complexity provides a challenge to organic farming as well as to the implementation of nature considerations in general. It illustrates an underlying battle for the right to define nature and nature quality and essentially decide what organic farmers should work towards. We argue that successful implementation requires organic farmers to carefully consider what expectations they wish to meet. Optimally it is dependent on a dialog between stakeholder interest groups that allows for multivocality and pluralism.     

NEW FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR PRIORITY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT NEEDS1

ABSTRACT: In the past five years, USDA and EPA programs became major players in implementing watershed programs. The 1996 Farm Bill for the first time required that USDA assistance for farmers address priority environmental needs on a site‐specific, or watershed, basis. USDA involves farmers and other players in locally run watershed programs and focuses cost share and incentive payments on nutrient planning, riparian protection, and other practices prioritized to most efficiently achieve watershed goals. As a result, USDA has become a funding source for environmental initiatives targeted to watersheds, as well as a technical resource that attempts to support more efficient use of federal and state environmental expenditures. Analysis identifies institutional and technical barriers to targeting the very limited, new assistance and suggests how those barriers are being addressed by some innovative programs. Since Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and other state run programs face many of the same challenges of ranking watersheds, setting goals, and finding cost effective remedies, this paper identifies a very close fit between the new federal programs and other watershed programs.     

Social cost‐benefit analysis of intensive versus traditional shrimp farming: A case study from India

This paper attempts a social cost‐benefit analysis of intensive versus traditional shrimp farming in West Bengal, India. Using primary data, the paper shows that although intensive shrimp farming yields high returns as compared to traditional shrimp farming, when the opportunity costs and environmental costs of shrimp farming, including disease risk, are accounted for, intensive shrimp farming loses its advantage. Sensitivity analysis shows that if the expected benefits were to fall short by 15% and costs rise by a similar proportion, intensive shrimp farmers would report higher losses than traditional shrimp farmers. Large traditional shrimp farmers continue to report positive net returns. These results are also most pronounced for small and marginal intensive shrimp farmers. Further, if the probability of disease risk is also accounted for, intensive shrimp farming reports significant losses whereas traditional shrimp farming in most cases shows positive net returns. In light of the high social costs and risks, this paper questions the rationale behind promoting intensive shrimp farming, especially among small and marginal holdings, as an income‐generating activity or poverty alleviation measure in the absence of an enabling environment. It suggests that policymakers need to factor in sustainability concerns and the local context when formulating policies to promote intensive shrimp farming.     

Explaining land management decisions to understand local landscape functions and change. Some insights from Tuscany

Structural changes in agriculture and urbanisation affect land management regimes and local landscape functions. Studying the new functions of land is as relevant as the owners' land management decisions, the replacement of farming with different activities and land uses may impact not only the local landscape's functions but also, in the long run, its structure and the environment. Drawing on a detailed case study in Tuscany based on qualitative interviews with landowners and on the understanding of the socio-economic context, this article analyses landowners' attitudes towards land property and farming in relation to individual motives as well as to local and supra-local contexts. Five relational typologies of landowners are identified: pure farmers, amenity farmers, land developers, land-with-house owners and house-with-land owners. Diverse trends – such as particular farmers’ attitudes towards land development, or the emerging role of non-professional farmers in land management – are found to raise challenges related to rural land planning and management.     

Prioritisation of farm scale remediation efforts for reducing losses of nutrients and faecal indicator organisms to waterways: a case study of New Zealand dairy farming

The international competitiveness of the New Zealand (NZ) dairy industry is built on low cost clover-based systems and a favourable temperate climate that enables cows to graze pastures mostly all year round. Whilst this grazed pasture farming system is very efficient at producing milk, it has also been identified as a significant source of nutrients (N and P) and faecal bacteria which have contributed to water quality degradation in some rivers and lakes. In response to these concerns, a tool-box of mitigation measures that farmers can apply on farm to reduce environmental emissions has been developed. Here we report the potential reduction in nutrient losses and costs to farm businesses arising from the implementation of individual best management practices (BMPs) within this tool-box. Modelling analysis was carried out for a range of BMPs targeting pollutant source reduction on case-study dairy farms, located in four contrasting catchments. Due to the contrasting physical resources and management systems present in the four dairy catchments evaluated, the effectiveness and costs of BMPs varied. Farm managements that optimised soil Olsen P levels or used nitrification inhibitors were observed to result in win-win outcomes whereby nutrient losses were consistently reduced and farm profitability was increased in three of the four case study farming systems. Other BMPs generally reduced nutrient and faecal bacteria losses but at a small cost to the farm business. Our analysis indicates that there are a range of technological measures that can deliver substantial reductions in nutrient losses to waterways from dairy farms, whilst not increasing or even reducing other environmental impacts (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions and energy use). Their implementation will first require clearly defined environmental goals for the catchment/water body that is to be protected. Secondly, given that the major sources of water pollutants often differed between catchments, it is important that BMPs are matched to the physical resources and management systems of the existing farm businesses.     

Result-oriented approaches to the management of drinking water catchments in agricultural landscapes

Management of water quality in drinking water catchments is of ongoing, high importance as nitrate concentrations are often still very high. We analysed the Augsburg catchment in Germany, a unique example where a result-oriented approach has been implemented. We investigated the historical evolution of the water protection programme, the result-oriented payment contracts with farmers, and farmer satisfaction with the contracts, based on interviews with the water utility and farmers as well as an analysis of the literature. Today, the water protection programme has been successfully implemented, and a significant reduction of nitrate concentration was achieved due to the following factors: (1) investment of non-negligible amounts of money for high compensation and remuneration payments, (2) different contract options, (3) farmers’ participation in the negotiation process for result-oriented payment contracts, (4) involvement of “outside” people and institutions in negotiation processes, (5) anticipation of starting a programme when nitrate levels were still far below legislative thresholds, and (6) a political and legislative framework allowing direct decisions by a water supplier.     

A Decision Support Framework for Environmental Planning in Developing Countries

This paper presents a decision support framework for environmental planning in developing countries. The interest in protecting the natural environment from pollution gained increased importance in the 1990s with a push by world communities for sustainable development. Developing countries as well as the industrialized nations are expected to cut down on pollution and control the use of non-renewable natural resources. Although the concept of sustainable development sounds plausible, it is difficult to implement in many countries due to their conflicting goals. The world-wide targets on emissions, use of fossil fuels, reduction in water and atmospheric pollution require the participation of every nation. These goals are not easily achievable by some of the poorer developing countries partly because of their economic dependence on natural resources and partly because of their inability to afford more modern and efficient technologies. Thus, environmental planning goals are often in conflict with the development,social and economic needs of a country. In this paper, we develop a decision support framework that utilizes multicriteria and optimization models to address environmental planning problems. This framework is based on identifying the priorities of conflicting goals by working through and reducing the conflicts. A strategic planning framework is introduced into the decision support system since national planning is a strategic issue and these goals can only be achieved by adopting a systemic view.     

Ecosystem services in infrastructure planning – a case study of the projected deepening of the Lower Weser river in Germany

We consider how ecosystem services can be incorporated into water infrastructure planning by studying the projected deepening of the Lower Weser river channel in Germany. We recalculate the project's benefit–cost ratio by integrating the monetary value of changes in different ecosystem services, as follows: (1) the restoration costs of a mitigation measure for a loss in fresh water supply for agricultural production in the estuary region, (2) the costs of a loss in habitat services, transferring the willingness to pay from a contingent valuation study to the area assessed in the environmental impact assessment, and (3) the benefits of emissions savings induced by more efficient shipping, taking a marginal abatement cost approach. We find that including monetary values for ecosystem service changes leads to a substantial drop in the benefit–cost ratio. On this basis, we argue for a reform of the standard cost–benefit analysis to facilitate more complete welfare assessments.     

Farmers Engaged in Deliberative Practices; An Ethnographic Exploration of the Mosaic of Concerns in Livestock Agriculture

A plethora of ethical issues in livestock agriculture has emerged to public attention in recent decades, of which environmental and animal welfare concerns are but two, albeit prominent, themes. For livestock agriculture to be considered sustainable, somehow these interconnected themes need to be addressed. Ethical debate on these issues has been extensive, but mostly started from and focused on single issues. The views of farmers in these debates have been largely absent, or merely figured as interests, instead of being considered morally worthwhile themselves. In this paper the relevance for ethical debates of the ways farmers discuss and engage with moral concerns is explored. The variety of norms that figure in contemporary farming practices is sketched in its multifarious complexity, illustrated by ethnographic fieldwork, and systematized in terms of “orders of worth.” Reviewing the practical arguments and commitments of farmers within this framework reveals that farming practices are subject to mixed motives, in which an amalgam of types of concerns play a role. Recognition of the peculiarly entangled nature of the ethics of farming practices could counter the tendency in policy making, technological innovation, and ethical thought to compartmentalize our moral landscape. Understanding farming practice as the integration of a mosaic of concerns in the light of a variety of moral experiences would foster public appreciation of positions of farmers in debates on improving the sustainability and societal acceptability of livestock agriculture.     

Assessing the environmental performance of English arable and livestock holdings using data from the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN)

Agri-environment schemes (AESs) have been implemented across EU member states in an attempt to reconcile agricultural production methods with protection of the environment and maintenance of the countryside. To determine the extent to which such policy objectives are being fulfilled, participating countries are obliged to monitor and evaluate the environmental, agricultural and socio-economic impacts of their AESs. However, few evaluations measure precise environmental outcomes and critically, there are no agreed methodologies to evaluate the benefits of particular agri-environmental measures, or to track the environmental consequences of changing agricultural practices. In response to these issues, the Agri-Environmental Footprint project developed a common methodology for assessing the environmental impact of European AES. The Agri-Environmental Footprint Index (AFI) is a farm-level, adaptable methodology that aggregates measurements of agri-environmental indicators based on Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) techniques. The method was developed specifically to allow assessment of differences in the environmental performance of farms according to participation in agri-environment schemes. The AFI methodology is constructed so that high values represent good environmental performance. This paper explores the use of the AFI methodology in combination with Farm Business Survey data collected in England for the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN), to test whether its use could be extended for the routine surveillance of environmental performance of farming systems using established data sources. Overall, the aim was to measure the environmental impact of three different types of agriculture (arable, lowland livestock and upland livestock) in England and to identify differences in AFI due to participation in agri-environment schemes. However, because farm size, farmer age, level of education and region are also likely to influence the environmental performance of a holding, these factors were also considered. Application of the methodology revealed that only arable holdings participating in agri-environment schemes had a greater environmental performance, although responses differed between regions. Of the other explanatory variables explored, the key factors determining the environmental performance for lowland livestock holdings were farm size, farmer age and level of education. In contrast, the AFI value of upland livestock holdings differed only between regions. The paper demonstrates that the AFI methodology can be used readily with English FADN data and therefore has the potential to be applied more widely to similar data sources routinely collected across the EU-27 in a standardised manner.     

Towards a planning support system for environmental management and agri-environmental measures--the Colorfields study

The authors present the beginnings of a planning support system (PSS) for agri-environmental measures exemplified by a virtual implementation of Colorfields and blooming strips on model farms, based on real-world data. This paper starts with an introduction to the Colorfields, a concept for transdisciplinary and sustainable landscape design of set-aside land. Colorfields comprise of blooming strips of flowering annual or biennial plants, which are designed and drilled in pattern on fallow land creating Land Art. The temporary scenic arrangements of the Colorfields combine the advantages of ecological strips, e.g. providing habitats for insects (especially bees), improving soil fertility through the cultivation of intercrops, with improvements of the social recognition of farmers as producers of pleasant landscapes instead of monoculture fields.The prototype of the PSS uses two software tools of different scientific origin, the bio-economic modeling system MODAM and the landscape visualization system Lenné3D, which are linked based on geo-data. The resulting system helps to assess the economic effects and visualizes the effects of the specific landuse patterns under different scenarios.The economic assessment of blooming strips on arable land and of one Colorfield on fallow land shows that these measures prove to be profitable from an economic viewpoint assuming the current area payments for the obligatory European Union set-aside program. Furthermore, the visualizations enable the design to be tested virtually by exploring the resultant scenery. They provide artists, planners and stakeholders including farmers with a tool to virtually wander through landscape scenarios supporting a collaborative design and a shared vision for the community.The results of the two model farms and previous case studies for Colorfields demonstrate how current policy conditions could be used for the improvement of environmental and scenic qualities. Furthermore, the ability of the tools, MODAM and Lenné3D, suggests to support and promote these activities.     

Farming and Landscape Management: How French Farmers are Coping with the Ecologization of Their Activities

In Europe, an increasing share of public subsidies for food production is being transferred towards the production of goods and environmental services. Today, farmers hesitate between the quest for technical and economic performance, which has been the paradigm of their professional activities since the 1960s, on one hand, and taking account of the environmental concerns that have been imposed since the middle of the 80s, on the other. Is it possible for farmers to continue to work according to the paradigm of the producer of agri-food goods, and how do they react to the ecologization of their activities? In this paper, we will see the difficulties and sources of tension induced by landscape maintenance in the daily professional practice of the farmers. We will see that the professional identity of the farmers is profoundly brought into question by these changes (substitution of strictly “agricultural issues” by more general concerns such as “rural issues,” substitution of the farmer by the “ecologized” peasant...). The topic of landscape reveals social strains between farmers. It also raises the question of the legitimacy of farmers to define the sense of their activities by themselves. Finally we will see that environmental orientations do not systematically open up new prospects for all farmers; they sometimes contribute to increase the inequalities between farmers (financial support proportional to land property, marginalization of farmers who are less socially integrated...).     

Investigating biodiversity trajectories using scenarios – Lessons from two contrasting agricultural landscapes

Agriculture is the major land use at a global scale. In addition to food production, multifunctionality of landscapes, including values and ecosystem services like biodiversity, recreation and culture, is now focus for management. This study explores how a scenario approach, involving different stakeholders, may help to improve landscape management for biodiversity conservation. Local farmers and executives at the County Administrative Board were invited to discuss rural development and conditions for farmland biodiversity in two Swedish landscapes. The potential biodiversity for three future land use scenarios for the two landscapes was discussed: nature conservation, outdoor recreation and energy production, and compared with current and historical landscapes in each region.Analyses of habitat areas, connectedness and landscape diversity suggested that the energy and recreation scenarios had a negative impact on farmland biodiversity, whereas the nature conservation scenario, the current and historically reconstructed landscapes had a higher potential for biodiversity. The farmers appreciated the nature conservation scenario, but also the energy production scenario and they highlighted the need of increased subsidies for management of biodiversity. The farmers in the high production area were less interested in nature quality per se. The executives had similar opinions as the farmers, but disagreed on the advantages with energy production, as this would be in conflict with the high biodiversity and recreational values. The local physical and socio-economical conditions differ between landscapes and potentially shaped the stakeholders emotional attachment to the local environment, their opinions and decisions on how to manage the land. We stress the importance of incorporating local knowledge, visions and regional prerequisites for different land uses in conservation, since site and landscape specific planning for biodiversity together with a flexible subsidy system are necessary to reach the conservation goals within EU.