Exploring farmers’ perspectives on collective action: a case study on co-operation in Dutch agri-environment schemes

To improve the ecological effectiveness of agri-environment-climate measures (AECM), collective approaches to co-ordinate AECM beyond the farm level have emerged, which are characterised by different levels of co-operation between individual farmers. As participation is voluntary, understanding farmers’ perspectives on collective action in the context of these economic incentive instruments is crucial to improve existing or design novel approaches. We conducted a Q study on farmers’ viewpoints on collective AECM in the Netherlands, where all AECM have to be realised jointly since 2016. Our results reveal three dominant views on collective AECM: a collective-oriented, a business-oriented and an environment-oriented perspective. Clear preferences for the collective approach show that even in cultures with strong values of independence joint action is possible, as farmers’ autonomy can be strengthened through co-operation. Considering different perspectives on collective approaches within the institutional design can help to develop more targeted, and thus successful, incentives

Metadata to describe the dataset on involved actors and their roles in the governance of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes

Agri-environmental and climate schemes are an important policy instrument in the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union to maintain biodiversity and safeguard ecosystem services provision for human wellbeing. In the presented dataset, we analyzed 19 innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes from six European countries, representing examples of four different contract types: result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts. Our analytical approach comprised three steps: In the first step, we used a method mix combining literature review, web search, and expert consultation to identify potential case examples for the innovative contracts. In the second step, we employed a survey, which was structured in accordance with Ostrom's institutional analysis and development framework to collect detailed information on each contract. The survey was either filled in by us authors, based on information retrieved from websites and other data sources, or by experts directly involved in the different contracts. Based on the collected data, in the third step, an in-depth analysis was conducted on the public, private, and civil actors involved from different governance levels (local, regional, national, or international) and the roles these actors perform in contract governance. The dataset generated through these three steps contains 84 data files, which includes tables, figures, maps, and a text file. The dataset can be re-used by all interested in result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes. Each contract is characterized in great detail by 34 variables making the dataset suitable for further institutional and governance analysis

Institutional analysis of actors involved in the governance of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes

Acknowledgements We like to thank all who contributed to the identification of cases and data collection. Here special thanks are due to Sigrid Aubert, Carla Barros Erismann, Sven Defrijn, Lisa Deijl, Jennifer Dodsworth, Cédric Gendre, Johannes Koberstein, Annabelle LePage, Julia Rex, Anne Sallent, Lenny van Bussel, Korneel Verslyppe, and Carleen Weebers. We also like to thank our colleagues Bettina Matzdorf and Boldizsár Megyesi for their feedback on an earlier draft of the manuscript. Funding The research conducted for this study was financially supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation action ‘Contracts2.0’ funded under grant agreement no. 818190. RB acknowledges support through the project ‘LANDSCAPER’ funded by the Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Viewpoints on Cooperative Peatland Management: Expectations and Motives of Dutch Farmers

The European Union (EU) is globally the second highest emitter of greenhouse gases from drained peatlands. On the national level, 15% of agricultural peat soils in the Netherlands are responsible for 34% of agricultural emissions. Crucial to any successful policy is a better understanding of the behavioral change it will bring about among the target groups. Thus, we aim to explore farmers’ differing viewpoints to discuss how policy and planning can be improved to ensure landscape-scale climate mitigation on agriculturally used peatlands. Q methodology was used to interview fifteen farmers on Dutch peat soils, whereby 37 statements were ranked in a grid according to their level of agreement. Factor analysis revealed three main viewpoints: farmers with a higher peat proportion show an urgency in continuing to use their land (‘cooperative businesspeople’), while ‘independent opportunists’ are wary of cooperation compromising their sense of autonomy. Farmers who are ‘conditional land stewards’ are open to agriculture without drainage but require appropriate payments to do so. Future policy design must focus on providing support to farmers that go beyond compensation payments by providing information about funding sources as well as potential business models for peatland uses with raised water tables

Key concepts to investigate agri-environmental contracts – shared conceptual framework

The Contracts2.0 project aims to develop novel contract-based approaches to incentivise farmers for the increased provision of environmental public goods alongside private goods. The background to this work is the current imbalance in the provision of private and public goods from agricultural land management. This complex problem can best be addressed by using insights and methods from a range of disciplines. However, for methods and researchers to complement each other and contribute to the project aim, the parts must be brought together as a coherent whole. We developed a conceptual framework which draws on different concepts to explain the issues underlying the delivery of private and public environmental goods from agriculture

Exploring farmers’ perspectives on collective action: a case study on co-operation in Dutch agri-environment schemes

To improve the ecological effectiveness of agri-environment-climate measures (AECM), collective approaches to co-ordinate AECM beyond the farm level have emerged, which are characterised by different levels of co-operation between individual farmers. As participation is voluntary, understanding farmers’ perspectives on collective action in the context of these economic incentive instruments is crucial to improve existing or design novel approaches. We conducted a Q study on farmers’ viewpoints on collective AECM in the Netherlands, where all AECM have to be realised jointly since 2016. Our results reveal three dominant views on collective AECM: a collective-oriented, a business-oriented and an environment-oriented perspective. Clear preferences for the collective approach show that even in cultures with strong values of independence joint action is possible, as farmers’ autonomy can be strengthened through co-operation. Considering different perspectives on collective approaches within the institutional design can help to develop more targeted, and thus successful, incentives

More than spatial coordination – How Dutch agricultural collectives foster social capital for effective governance of agri-environmental measures

Collective approaches for agri-environmental measures are known for aiming at spatial coordination of measures to enhance ecological effectiveness. In the Netherlands, governance networks for agri-environmental measures are centered around agricultural collectives that function as intermediaries between individual farmers and governmental as well as non-governmental actors. Against the background that some agricultural collectives are bottom-up and other top-down initiated, we analyzed in how far they can build up social capital through formal and informal relations. We used the Net-Map method to collect qualitative and quantitative data for a Social Network Analysis to uncover the network characteristics that contribute to a certain level of social capital. The results revealed that the umbrella organization links the collectives to the national governmental level and to other collectives. This is especially important for top-down initiated collectives. The facilitation of internal meetings within the collectives is important for social learning. Furthermore, a formalization of the exchange between collectives and stakeholders of nature conservation could strengthen cooperation where traditionally conflicts dominate. By analyzing interaction in detail, the social reasoning to promote collective agri-environmental measures was highlighted. They enable collaboration of different stakeholders at multiple levels to the end that knowledge and resources are bundled

Metadata to describe the dataset on involved actors and their roles in the governance of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes

Agri-environmental and climate schemes are an important policy instrument in the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union to maintain biodiversity and safeguard ecosystem services provision for human wellbeing. In the presented dataset, we analyzed 19 innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes from six European countries, representing examples of four different contract types: result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts. Our analytical approach comprised three steps: In the first step, we used a method mix combining literature review, web search, and expert consultation to identify potential case examples for the innovative contracts. In the second step, we employed a survey, which was structured in accordance with Ostrom's institutional analysis and development framework to collect detailed information on each contract. The survey was either filled in by us authors, based on information retrieved from websites and other data sources, or by experts directly involved in the different contracts. Based on the collected data, in the third step, an in-depth analysis was conducted on the public, private, and civil actors involved from different governance levels (local, regional, national, or international) and the roles these actors perform in contract governance. The dataset generated through these three steps contains 84 data files, which includes tables, figures, maps, and a text file. The dataset can be re-used by all interested in result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes. Each contract is characterized in great detail by 34 variables making the dataset suitable for further institutional and governance analysis

Motivations of farmers to participate in collective agri-environmental schemes: the case of Dutch agricultural collectives

Collective agri-environmental schemes are designed to improve the spatial coordination and targeting of agri-environmental measures. However, policymakers must craft these programs carefully to motivate farmers to participate. This of course requires knowing what factors actually influence farmers, since they relate to ecosystems in different ways. In the Netherlands, agricultural collectives appear to play an important role in motivating farmers, since they facilitate contracting and help farmers maintain communication with one another. The aim of this study is to explore the various motivations farmers have to participate in collective agri-environmental schemes, which can in turn provide insight on how to approach farmers and recruit them for such programs, taking Dutch agricultural collectives as a case study. To do so, we first developed a literature-based framework on motivational categories, which were reviewed and discussed in a workshop setting; these categories were then ranked and quantified in a survey among representatives of the Dutch agricultural collectives. Results showed that economic and environmentally-based motivations of farmers are perceived as equally important. The relevance of socially-based motivations is perceived less uniformly, although the agricultural collectives may profit from their farmers’ social commitment to cooperate. This implies that there is a need for greater exchange among agricultural collectives, to help disseminate previously applied strategies designed to maintain high levels of personal communication and to establish long-term relationships

Viewpoints on Cooperative Peatland Management: Expectations and Motives of Dutch Farmers

The European Union (EU) is globally the second highest emitter of greenhouse gases from drained peatlands. On the national level, 15% of agricultural peat soils in the Netherlands are responsible for 34% of agricultural emissions. Crucial to any successful policy is a better understanding of the behavioral change it will bring about among the target groups. Thus, we aim to explore farmers’ differing viewpoints to discuss how policy and planning can be improved to ensure landscape-scale climate mitigation on agriculturally used peatlands. Q methodology was used to interview fifteen farmers on Dutch peat soils, whereby 37 statements were ranked in a grid according to their level of agreement. Factor analysis revealed three main viewpoints: farmers with a higher peat proportion show an urgency in continuing to use their land (‘cooperative businesspeople’), while ‘independent opportunists’ are wary of cooperation compromising their sense of autonomy. Farmers who are ‘conditional land stewards’ are open to agriculture without drainage but require appropriate payments to do so. Future policy design must focus on providing support to farmers that go beyond compensation payments by providing information about funding sources as well as potential business models for peatland uses with raised water tables