Identifying economic and societal drivers of engagement in agri-environmental schemes for English dairy producers
Identifying economic and societal drivers of engagement in agri-environmental schemes for English dairy producers
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105174
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-02
期刊：
影响因子：
7.1
通讯作者：
Williams, D. J. L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Coyne, L.;Kendall, H.;Williams, D. J. L.
畜牧业生产对环境的影响及其在气候变化中的更广泛作用正受到越来越多的审查。因此，现在有越来越多的私营农业环境计划与公共农业环境计划一起运作，为农民提供经济奖励，以维护和改善环境。这项研究专门集中在少数商业乳制品生产商位于英格兰西北部谁是全球食品生产商的供应商和生产商自己的私人AES.The研究探讨了通过农业环境行为和私人处理器AES的看法的经济和社会驱动因素。研究采用了混合方法。在第一阶段，使用结构化问卷来探讨全球食品加工商提供的AES在奶牛场财务稳定性和环境可持续性方面的作用（n = 20）。该调查旨在了解所采取的干预措施的范围，探索未来的采用意图，并确定可能的方式，其中AES可以扩展。在第二阶段，通过定性深入访谈（n = 12）进一步探讨了问卷调查的结果。采取了专题分析方法来描述激励农民参与农业环境计划的关键主题，总体而言，农民认为，私营农业环境援助计划的收入为其企业提供了稳定性和复原力，使他们对来年的业务规划和预算编制更有信心。大多数农民并不是公共农业生态系统的一部分，但已经采取了一些农业环境行为，并主要是由于财政奖励和维护自然环境的愿望而加入私营计划。少数答复者指出，提供的经济奖励直接促使行为改变。决定采用哪些农业环境行为是由现有的动物管理实践，地理和景观的农场。农民比较有利的私人计划，以现有的公共AES，他们认为更有限制性，并提供足够的回报，为“繁文缛节”参与。相比之下，私人计划成员被认为对他们的农业企业和当地环境都有好处，许多人报告说，他们对从事农业环境行为感到满意。重要的是，未来公共农业补贴计划的设计不应“排挤”私人计划，使农民有更多的农业补贴计划选择，并增加可用于提供农业公益物的资金总额。
Livestock production is under increasing scrutiny regarding its impacts on the environment and its wider role in climate change. Consequently, there are a growing number of private agri-environmental schemes (AES) now operating alongside public AES that offer farmers economic rewards to maintain and enhance the environment. This study focused exclusively on a small number of commercial dairy producers located in the North West of England who were all suppliers of a global food producer and members of the producer's own private AES.The study explored the economic and societal drivers of adoption of agri-environmental behaviours and perceptions of the private processor AES. The study adopted a mixed-method approach. In Stage 1 a structured questionnaire was used to explore the role of an AES offered by the global food processor in the financial stability and environmental sustainability of dairy farms (n = 20). The survey sought to understand the range of interventions adopted, explore future adoption intentions and identify possible ways in which AESs could be extended. The results from the questionnaire were explored further in Stage 2, through qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 12). A thematic analysis approach was taken to describe the key themes that motivated farmer engagement in agri-environmental schemes.Overall, farmers felt that income from the private AES provided stability and resilience to their businesses, permitting them to have greater confidence in business planning and budgeting for the upcoming year. The majority of the farmers were not part of a public AES, but were already undertaking some agri-environmental behaviours and were motivated to join the private scheme primarily by financial incentives and by a desire to maintain the natural environment. A minority of respondents identified that the financial incentives offered had directly motivated a behaviour change. Decisions over which agri-environmental behaviours to adopt were driven by the existing animal management practices, geography and landscape of the farm.Farmers compared the private scheme favourably to available public AESs, which they perceived as more restrictive and providing insufficient reward for the "red tape" involved. In contrast, private scheme membership was perceived to have been beneficial for both their farm business and the local environment, and many reported personal satisfaction from engagement in agri-environmental behaviours. It is important that the design of future public AES does not "crowd out" private schemes, giving farmers increasing AES choice and increasing the overall amount of funding available for the delivery of public goods from agriculture.