新的生态方案能否取代久已为人所知的农业环境措施?证据从两个标记离散选择实验

IF 6 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
S. Anougmar , L. Fockaert , K. Michiel , S. Van Passel , S. Van Schoubroeck
{"title":"新的生态方案能否取代久已为人所知的农业环境措施?证据从两个标记离散选择实验","authors":"S. Anougmar ,&nbsp;L. Fockaert ,&nbsp;K. Michiel ,&nbsp;S. Van Passel ,&nbsp;S. Van Schoubroeck","doi":"10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the context of the most recent reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy (2023–2027), new voluntary environment-friendly measures have been introduced. These measures, termed eco-schemes, represent one-year arrangements with limited restrictions. They are, therefore, considered to be more flexible than the revised and more demanding agri-environment-climate measures (AECM). The introduction of the new eco-schemes, alongside the AECM, raises questions regarding 1) the acceptance of eco-schemes by farmers, and 2) the impact on adoption of AECM. Would farmers prefer to continue with familiar measures or opt for the new, less restrictive, and shorter eco-schemes? To address these questions, two discrete choice experiments (a stated preference method) were conducted on a sample of 360 farmers with previous AECM experience. These experiments focus exclusively on grassland-related measures, as they are available in both contract forms, eco-schemes and AECM. The results reveal a general aversion to voluntary agri-environmental measures. However, farmers are more inclined to implement the new eco-schemes rather than the more familiar AECM, especially when the compensation of the latter is conditional on the environmental results. The findings also emphasize the impact of restrictions and the flexibility of the contract on farmers’ decision-making processes, particularly when dealing with result-based AECM.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17933,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Policy","volume":"153 ","pages":"Article 107525"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could the new eco schemes replace the long-known agri-environmental measures? Evidence from two labeled discrete choice experiments\",\"authors\":\"S. Anougmar ,&nbsp;L. Fockaert ,&nbsp;K. Michiel ,&nbsp;S. Van Passel ,&nbsp;S. Van Schoubroeck\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107525\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In the context of the most recent reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy (2023–2027), new voluntary environment-friendly measures have been introduced. These measures, termed eco-schemes, represent one-year arrangements with limited restrictions. They are, therefore, considered to be more flexible than the revised and more demanding agri-environment-climate measures (AECM). The introduction of the new eco-schemes, alongside the AECM, raises questions regarding 1) the acceptance of eco-schemes by farmers, and 2) the impact on adoption of AECM. Would farmers prefer to continue with familiar measures or opt for the new, less restrictive, and shorter eco-schemes? To address these questions, two discrete choice experiments (a stated preference method) were conducted on a sample of 360 farmers with previous AECM experience. These experiments focus exclusively on grassland-related measures, as they are available in both contract forms, eco-schemes and AECM. The results reveal a general aversion to voluntary agri-environmental measures. However, farmers are more inclined to implement the new eco-schemes rather than the more familiar AECM, especially when the compensation of the latter is conditional on the environmental results. The findings also emphasize the impact of restrictions and the flexibility of the contract on farmers’ decision-making processes, particularly when dealing with result-based AECM.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Land Use Policy\",\"volume\":\"153 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107525\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Land Use Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837725000584\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837725000584","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在欧洲共同农业政策(2023-2027)最近改革的背景下,引入了新的自愿环境友好措施。这些措施被称为生态计划,是一年的安排,限制有限。因此,它们被认为比修订后要求更高的农业-环境-气候措施(AECM)更灵活。与AECM一起引入新的生态方案提出了以下问题:1)农民对生态方案的接受程度,以及2)对采用AECM的影响。农民们是更愿意继续采取熟悉的措施,还是选择限制更少、时间更短的新生态计划?为了解决这些问题,我们对360名有AECM经验的农民进行了两次离散选择实验(陈述偏好法)。这些实验只关注与草原有关的措施,因为它们有合同形式、生态方案和AECM两种形式。调查结果显示,人们普遍厌恶自愿采取农业环境措施。然而,农民更倾向于实施新的生态方案,而不是更熟悉的AECM,特别是当后者的补偿以环境结果为条件时。研究结果还强调了限制和合同灵活性对农民决策过程的影响,特别是在处理基于结果的AECM时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Could the new eco schemes replace the long-known agri-environmental measures? Evidence from two labeled discrete choice experiments
In the context of the most recent reform of the European Common Agricultural Policy (2023–2027), new voluntary environment-friendly measures have been introduced. These measures, termed eco-schemes, represent one-year arrangements with limited restrictions. They are, therefore, considered to be more flexible than the revised and more demanding agri-environment-climate measures (AECM). The introduction of the new eco-schemes, alongside the AECM, raises questions regarding 1) the acceptance of eco-schemes by farmers, and 2) the impact on adoption of AECM. Would farmers prefer to continue with familiar measures or opt for the new, less restrictive, and shorter eco-schemes? To address these questions, two discrete choice experiments (a stated preference method) were conducted on a sample of 360 farmers with previous AECM experience. These experiments focus exclusively on grassland-related measures, as they are available in both contract forms, eco-schemes and AECM. The results reveal a general aversion to voluntary agri-environmental measures. However, farmers are more inclined to implement the new eco-schemes rather than the more familiar AECM, especially when the compensation of the latter is conditional on the environmental results. The findings also emphasize the impact of restrictions and the flexibility of the contract on farmers’ decision-making processes, particularly when dealing with result-based AECM.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Land Use Policy
Land Use Policy ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
8.50%
发文量
553
期刊介绍: Land Use Policy is an international and interdisciplinary journal concerned with the social, economic, political, legal, physical and planning aspects of urban and rural land use. Land Use Policy examines issues in geography, agriculture, forestry, irrigation, environmental conservation, housing, urban development and transport in both developed and developing countries through major refereed articles and shorter viewpoint pieces.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信