No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Environmental Co-operatives as Instruments for Delivering Across-Farm Environmental and Rural Policy Objectives: Lessons for the UK
Abstract
This paper assesses the potential of environmental co-operatives (EC) to deliver environmental benefits and an integrated and strengthened rural economy in the UK. It is based on research into Dutch EC, which have about 10,000 members, of which a quarter are non-farmers. The paper details the benefits EC have delivered to their members, the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, the environment and the rural economy using evidence drawn from interviews with farmer and non-farmer members, farmer non-members, policy makers and academics connected with seven EC. It pays particular attention to the benefits and disadvantages of allowing non-farmer membership. It is argued that EC would be a valuable additional instrument to help deliver landscape-scale environmental, regional and rural policy objectives. However, Dutch EC have received important political and, particularly in their start-up stage, financial support, and similar support would be needed in the UK—it is argued this may be more readily available if UK EC will offer non-farmer membership. Appropriate support could be provided through developments to the Environmental Stewardship Scheme's higher level tier, by safeguarding and extending the spirit of the LEADER plus programme (which explicitly supports collective action) to the delivery of environmental benefits, and/or by encouraging the development of locally based social enterprises.
... Since food is a basic need, the level of food demand should be less affected by the crisis compared to the demand for other goods and services [10]. However, the pandemic resulted in a massive change in the structure of demand, with falling demand from restaurants, hotels and caterers, closing of open markets, and falling demand from supermarkets [11]. ...
... During the Covid-19 pandemic, the three cooperatives took various strategic steps without involving members so that the member's participation score in strategic policy making was quite low. Member participation is felt to be hampering because the mechanism for discussions and meetings can take up quite a lot of time, while strategic policies must be taken immediately in the face of the uncertainty of the economic crisis [10]. In addition, the Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted the interaction of members, management, and cooperative administrators due to restrictions on social activities. ...
... Both have difficulty aligning the identity of the cooperative and a business strategy that is well implemented in operations. However, at least both of them have the courage to take risks to maintain the performance of their cooperative business entities [10]. Agro Mulyo Cooperative has a high cooperative identity with a score of 78.79 (green zone) although in the end it was limited in carrying out corporate business strategies which only scored 61.20 (yellow zone). ...
The Covid-19 pandemic has caused an economic crisis that has spread across all sectors. The one of food crisis does not originate from a supply crisis but from a purchasing power crisis and distribution barriers. Agribusiness cooperatives take an important role to support farmers in managing finances and food stocks. This study aims to analyze the performance of agribusiness cooperatives in East Java Province to maintain their identity and developing business strategies in the Covid-19 pandemic. The sample in this study were three agribusiness cooperatives in Nganjuk Regency. Methodologically, the analysis is carried out by assessing the identity of the cooperative using the Development Ladder Assessment method and assessing the corporate business strategy. Both measurements were carried out to obtain an overview of the strategic policy choices of agribusiness cooperatives in facing the crisis. Some identity issues include membership management and member participation which has decreased during the pandemic due to limited social interaction. During the pandemic, agribusiness cooperatives also strengthened business strategies with implement a human resource strategy by restructuring human resources and rearranging wage and incentive policies. The financial strategy is also carried out by tightening credit terms and increasing capital from external sources.
... A key challenge lies in creating options which are sustainable. This means preventing further carbon loss but also giving farmers a profitable opportunity to continue using their land [9,13,14]. ...
... For peatlands in particular, this means that a water table must be managed in contiguous areas to make a noticeable impact on the hydrological network [14][15][16][17][18]. This is referred to as a landscape-scale or an ecosystem-approach to peat management [19][20][21]. ...
... How farmers perceive cooperation is crucial for environmental measures to be successful at the landscape-scale [14]. This paper seeks to fill this gap by discussing the following questions: How do motivational profiles to engage in cooperative peatland management differ between farmers? 2. ...
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.
... Based on the importance of the social and cultural context of agri-environmental measures, one of the proposed improvements to current AES is organizing farmers in regional cooperatives by means of collective AES (Burton and Schwarz, 2013;Franks and Emery, 2013;Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Mills et al., 2011). These cooperatives are hypothesised to create a peer-group of farmers who all perform agri-environmental management. ...
... These so-called Environmental Cooperatives (ECs) were founded because of a growing concern amongst the farmer community about the direction of the Dutch agri-environment programme. Main points of concern were the top-down approach, the exclusion of farmers' opinions and an alleged lack of responsibility of farmers for the environment (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Groeneveld et al., 2004). From 2000 on the Dutch agri-environmental programme opened up the opportunity for ECs to apply for some regional agri-environment schemes such as the nature-friendly management of ditch banks and the protection of meadow birds (van Dijk et al., 2015). ...
... A second important finding in the study at hand that extends previous research was the marginally positive relation between facilitation by the EC and farmers' intention to perform unsubsidized environmental measures. Nowadays, ECs do not focus primarily on unsubsidised measures, but they sometimes facilitate some voluntary projects (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007). Furthermore, there could be some spill-over between skills related to subsidised measures farmers acquired through the EC and the application of these skills in unsubsidised measures. ...
Over the last decades there is a growing body of literature on how to enhance farmers’ participation in voluntary subsidised agri-environmental programmes. However, additional unsubsidised agri-environmental measures that farmers perform are often ignored. The willingness to perform these measures may give a better insight into farmers’ motivation for agri-environmental measures than subsidised measures because it likely depends only on farmers’ intrinsic motivation and not on extrinsic factors such as a financial compensation. In this study we used an extended version of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to investigate which factors are associated with farmers’ intention to perform unsubsidised agri-environmental measures. Our results demonstrate that attitude, perceived social norms and perceived personal ability are significantly associated with farmers’ intention to perform these measures. However, self-identity is the most dominant predictor of farmers’ intentions. Furthermore we found that Environmental Cooperatives (ECs) positively influence farmers’ willingness to perform additional unsubsidised measures by means of facilitation and group pressure. We conclude that in order to increase farmers’ willingness to perform agri-environmental measures, self-identity should be addressed by means of e.g. benchmarking instruments in combination with commitment making or labelling of environmental friendly identities. Also, ECs are more important for unsubsidised measures than previously assumed – we recommended that they change their focus to include unsubsidised as well as subsidised conservation.
... Los que forman parte del árbol del CO dieron una propuesta para desarrollar investigaciones empíricas donde los autores destacaron la gobernanza del sector cooperativo [32][33][34]. Otros, su rol aplicado al medio ambiente [35][36][37][38]. Finalmente hubo quienes resaltaron su labor como modelo de inclusión y desarrollo económico [39][40][41] . ...
... Así mismo, se realizaron diferentes análisis retrospectivos de la evolución de las CP enfocadas en el sector medioambiental y actividades de este tipo [35], [38]. En igual forma, se evaluó el potencial de las mismas para aportar beneficios medioambientales, mejorar e integrar la economía rural en el Reino Unido [36]. Luego, comprendieron cualitativamente los beneficios ambientales potenciales de estas organizaciones, donde reconocieron ciertas limitaciones [37]. ...
Resumen El presente documento permite exponer un análisis teórico acerca del cooperativismo, el cual se destaca como una solución integral a las necesidades de los individuos, donde a través de la inclusión socio productiva se reducen las brechas de desigualdad. Se indagaron las investigaciones publicadas en el rango de las dos últimas décadas, empleando como base de consulta la plataforma WOS, posteriormente se utilizó el esquema metafórico del árbol, catalogando los expedientes más relevantes a través de tres categorías, seminales, estructurales y recientes. Palabras clave: Cooperativismo, cooperativas, revisión de literatura, inclusión social, desarrollo. Abstract This document allows to present a theoretical analysis about cooperativism, which stands out as an integral solution to the needs of individuals, where inequality gaps are reduced through socio-productive inclusion. of the last two decades, using the WOS platform as a reference base, later the metaphorical scheme of the tree was used, cataloging the most relevant files through three categories: seminal, structural and recent.
... However, although examples of collaboration for agri-environmental outcomes in the EU exist (e.g. Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Steingröver et al., 2010), they remain isolated and are based on voluntary schemes. In other words, collaboration is made possible but collaborative approaches are neither compulsory nor in any other way an integral part of the EU agricultural policy framework. ...
... Steingröver et al., 2010). In particular, CAP at the EU level allows for the possibility of collaborative management and good practice examples are emerging, particularly in the Netherlands, demonstrating benefits to farmers and biodiversity (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007). However, such examples are isolated and relate to voluntary pillar 2 schemes, meaning that there is no compulsion to collaborate. ...
Over 25 years after the UNCED conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, agriculture in the European Union (EU) has below the line not come much closer to being sustainable. By now, efforts to promote sustainability in agriculture have predominantly been based on “mainstream science”. This has resulted in strategies directed mainly at agricultural production, measures targeted at individual farms, and a major focus on technology-centered solutions. Yet, there have been many claims emphasizing that such approaches are insufficient to deal with wicked, sustainability-related problems. Rather, it has been argued, we need to question the governance of sustainability issues, i.e. who makes which decisions in which way. A central aspect of sustainability governance is collaboration, which has been lauded for its benefits but also criticized
for its challenges.
The potential benefits of collaboration have apparently been recognized also in the context of EU agriculture. Yet, there has been a lack of holistic consideration of how collaboration can be systematically integrated and promoted in the governance of EU agriculture. Sustainable agriculture cannot only be encouraged through changes in the overall governance system but also through the support of existing and emerging
small-scale collaborative initiatives for sustainable agriculture. Indeed, there has been substantial research on the conditions that influence success of similar collaborative initiatives. However, the knowledge resulting from this research remains rather scattered and does not allow for the identification of overall patterns. Additionally, little of this research specifically focuses on sustainable agriculture. What is more, the promotion of collaboration for sustainable agriculture is further complicated by the lack of clarity of the meaning of sustainable agriculture, which is an inherently ambiguous and contested concept.
This cumulative dissertation aims to address these gaps by contributing to a better understanding of how collaboration can be facilitated and designed as a means to govern for and advance sustainable agriculture. For this purpose, the dissertation addresses three sub-aims: 1) Advancing the understanding of the concept of sustainable agriculture; 2) scrutinizing the current governance system regarding its potential to facilitate
or hamper collaboration; 3) assessing conceptually and empirically how actor collaboration can be facilitated as a means to govern for sustainable agriculture, both from a top-down and a bottom-up perspective. In doing so, this dissertation focuses on EU agriculture and applies a mix of methods, ranging from qualitative to quantitative dominant.
The findings of this dissertation highlight that collaboration has been underappreciated and even hampered as an approach to governing for sustainable agriculture. In contrast, this dissertation argues that collaboration offers one promising way to promoting and realizing agriculture and emphasizes the need to integrate different approaches to collaboration and to sustainable agriculture. Thus, the findings of this dissertation
encourage and justify more research, discussion, and action around collaboration in the context of sustainable agriculture. Additionally, the dissertation provides first tangible insights both on principles for systemic change to promote governance for sustainable agriculture and on factors that are crucial for the successful management of small-scale collaborative initiatives. Most importantly, this dissertation advocates an ‘integrative attitude’ among and between scientists and practitioners which could enable more collegial, collaborative and hopefully more constructive research, discussion and action for sustainable agriculture.
... Tensions and conflicts can intensify and take on new dimensions when cooperatives depart from a sectoral approach to open themselves up to heterogeneous multistakeholder collaborations as part of their diversification strategies or in the pursuit of wider territorial, societal or environmental aims. Tensions between different groups of producer members, as well as between producers and non-producers, can in this case emerge from the lack of shared fundamental values or from the greater organizational complexity entailed in multi-stakeholder collaborations (Jaklin et al., 2015;Fazzi, 2011;Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Ortiz-Miranda et al., 2010). Cooperative know-how, intended as a value-based mind-set constituting a specific form of social capital distinct from inter-personal skills and harmonious community relationships, seems however able to mitigate the negative effects of such tensions (Tregear and Cooper, 2016). ...
... Cooperative know-how, intended as a value-based mind-set constituting a specific form of social capital distinct from inter-personal skills and harmonious community relationships, seems however able to mitigate the negative effects of such tensions (Tregear and Cooper, 2016). Research on Dutch Environmental Cooperatives (EC), local organisations of farmers and non-farmers working in close collaboration with each other and with government agencies to integrate nature management into farming practices in a regional perspective, has similarly shown that farmers and non-farmers, although not always sharing common goals, can effectively exploit the potential of their cooperation to muster institutional support for joint environmental projects (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007). ...
... Tensions and conflicts can intensify and take on new dimensions when cooperatives depart from a sectoral approach to open themselves up to heterogeneous multistakeholder collaborations as part of their diversification strategies or in the pursuit of wider territorial, societal or environmental aims. Tensions between different groups of producer members, as well as between producers and non-producers, can in this case emerge from the lack of shared fundamental values or from the greater organizational complexity entailed in multi-stakeholder collaborations (Jaklin et al., 2015;Fazzi, 2011;Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Ortiz-Miranda et al., 2010). Cooperative know-how, intended as a value-based mind-set constituting a specific form of social capital distinct from inter-personal skills and harmonious community relationships, seems however able to mitigate the negative effects of such tensions (Tregear and Cooper, 2016). ...
... Cooperative know-how, intended as a value-based mind-set constituting a specific form of social capital distinct from inter-personal skills and harmonious community relationships, seems however able to mitigate the negative effects of such tensions (Tregear and Cooper, 2016). Research on Dutch Environmental Cooperatives (EC), local organisations of farmers and non-farmers working in close collaboration with each other and with government agencies to integrate nature management into farming practices in a regional perspective, has similarly shown that farmers and non-farmers, although not always sharing common goals, can effectively exploit the potential of their cooperation to muster institutional support for joint environmental projects (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007). ...
... Dues payment by members could have been more encouraging. Most farmers' cooperative members join and remain in the societies to gain benefits from government agricultural assistance (Franks & Mc Gloin, 2007). This was also evident in the result of this study, as shown in Table 2, where the attitude of members' dues payment was deplorable. ...
JEL Classification Codes: O13 Peer-Review Model: External peer-review was done through double-blind method. A B S T R A C T To uncover the constraints and entry points for improving the operational performance of farmers' cooperative societies in southeast Nigeria forms the motivation for this study. Farmers' cooperatives have enormous potential to support economic growth at the rural and regional levels, building on the spirit of teamwork that is already common among the rural people. A decent number of qualities differentiate cooperative associations from other different entities. These comprise open and voluntary enrollment. Cooperative social orders are available to all citizenry with common interests. This study analyzed responses from two hundred and forty respondents selected through a multi-stage sampling procedure. Frequency, mean, Likert scale and ordered logit regression model were used for the analysis. The perception of members of farmers' cooperative societies on their operational performance showed that the cooperatives in the area performed well in terms of members' access to training, participation during decision-making, voting during elections, and leaders' emergence through the democratic process. The ordered logit regression result of the socioeconomic factors to the operational performance of the farmers' cooperatives showed that membership strength, Age of the cooperatives, access to free input, access to training, and access to infrastructural facilities were statistically significant and positively related to farmers' cooperatives level of operational performance. Thus, the study recommends that Cooperative societies supply their members' goods and services for improved income and savings investment, improved productivity, and bargaining power through maximum utilization of economies of scale and cost and risk sharing.
... The concept governing the Associative network's formation of ties between farmers is the potential to incorporate information about the farmer's membership of cooperatives, corporations or producer organisations. It is important to add the influence of these types of organisations on the network since farmers are strongly affected in their decision-making by being part of one of these groups (Franks and Mc Gloin 2007). The Associative network is exogenous and predetermined at the beginning of the simulation. ...
... Chaplin et al., 2021;Herzon et al., 2018;Mack et al., 2020;Ruas et al., 2021), collective (e.g. Barghusen et al., 2021;Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;van Dijk et al., 2015;Westerink et al., 2017;Zaga-Mendez et al., 2021), land tenure (e.g. Benez-Secanho and Dwivedi, 2020;Curran et al., 2016;Eder et al., 2021;Jackson et al., 2021;Tseng et al., 2021), and value chain contracts (e.g. ...
In this study, we used institutional analysis to investigate the design of innovative contracts for agri-environmental and climate schemes. The aim of such contracts is to better incentivize farmers for the provision of environmental public goods in comparison to current 'mainstream' contracts. For the analysis, we differentiated four contract types: result-based, collective, land tenure, and value chain contracts. To represent each type in the analysis, we selected 19 case examples from six European countries. Cases were identified through a mix of methods, combining literature review, web search, and expert consultation. After a structured data collection based on Ostrom's institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework, we focused our analysis on the involved actors and their roles in contract governance. Our results highlight the great diversity of public, private, and civil actors involved from the local, regional, national or international governance level, each performing one or several critical roles in contract governance. We found that it is highly context-dependent which actors assume certain roles. We also discuss how provision of environmental public goods through the contracts might potentially be impacted by certain roles and their assignment to specific actors.
... Their main advantage is strengthening the voice of farmers when implementing new projects. Similar formalised farmers' cooperation groups operate, among others in Germany (Prager & Vanclay, 2010) and in Great Britain (Franks et al., 2007). ...
The article aims to evaluate the cooperation of Polish farmers from Łódź Voivodeship with science and other farmers in the field of implementing innovation in farms. Paper and Pencil Interview (PAPI) method was used. The analysis covers 150 Polish farms located in the Łódź Voivodeship. The farms for the study were selected from the Polish FADN (Farm Accountancy Data Network) sample. The study was made in 2018. The conducted research has proved that interest in scientific achievements depends on the innovativeness of farms. The cooperation between Polish farmers from Łódź Voivodeship in the field of innovation activity do not differ in terms of their farming type. A consequence of the selection of farms is the lack of the ability to generalize the results to the entire population of farms in the Łódź Voivodeship. The added value of the analysis is the presentation of the results in terms of farm innovation.
... Several research studies in Ethiopia (Abate, 2018;Francesconi & Ruben, 2012), Abuja (Ajah, 2015) and Bangladesh (Sultana, Ahmed, & Shiratake, 2020) recognize the differences and advantages between cooperative and non cooperative farmers. Most of the studies underline the economic benefits of cooperative members (Anderson, Brushett, Gray, & Renting, 2014;Falco, Smale, & Perrings, 2008;Franks & Mc Gloin, 2007;Grashuis & Su, 2019;Hovhannisyan & Vasa, 2007, 2007Larsén, 2008;Nagy & Takacs, 2001;Valentinov, 2007) by increasing their level of income and output (Fischer & Qaim, 2014;Ibezim, Okorogwe, & Ijioma, 2010;Ito, Bao, & Su, 2012;Sultana et al., 2020;Twumasi et al., 2021;Vandeplas, Minten, & Swinnen, 2013;Verhofstadt & Maertens, 2014;Wang, Cheng, Lee, Sun, & Chang, 2019), providing a secured market (Giagnocavo, Galdeano-Gómez, & Pérez-Mesa, 2018;Sultana et al., 2020), getting more access to labor, loan, tractor services, storage and processing equipment (Ajah, 2015), and improving the bargaining power of smallholders (Bijman & Hu, 2011) help minimize the risks they confront in the marketplace (Woldu, Tadesse, & Waller, 2013). Cooperative societies are also seen useful in overcoming issues such as sharing assets, data, services (Ahmed & Mesfin, 2017;Holloway, Nicholson, Delgado, Staal, & Ehui, 2000;Wossen et al., 2017) equality and caring for others are among the essential values on which authentic cooperatives and sometimes assisting farmers financially to buy equipment and seedlings for group use (Adeogun, Olawoye, & Akinbile, 2010) for high-value products. ...
As reported by the GDP per capita Kosovo is one of the poorest countries in Europe. Relying on the importance and dependence of Kosovo`s economy, it is evident that the development of agriculture sector is among the prime concern of the country`s strategy and international support programs. Several international studies assess the potential of agricultural cooperatives in transforming traditional agricultural farms to modern market-oriented business units, accelerating growth and addressing rural poverty. This research aims to analyze the relationship between socio-demographic, agricultural, and economic factors pertaining to cooperative and non-cooperative farmers in Kosovo and also shows their motivation and expectation related to agricultural practice and behavior. Primary data was collected in 2018 form 165 farmers through semi-structured questionnaires. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Chi square and T-test. The results indicated that there was a significant difference (p<0.01) between cooperative and non-cooperative farmers in various factors. Results indicated that the cooperative farmers have agricultural education, more family members are engaged in agricultural activity, have more access to seasonal employees, sharing machinery, higher readiness to invest in machinery with other farmers, and a high level of trust, they mostly operate in vegetable production and have higher income. Furthermore, the results showed differences in sales chain between two groups of farmers. The results contribute to governmental and non-governmental agencies to encourage farmers to establish/join viable cooperatives. JEL Classification: Q1, Q13, Q12
... Several research studies in Ethiopia (Abate, 2018;Francesconi & Ruben, 2012), Abuja (Ajah, 2015) and Bangladesh (Sultana, Ahmed, & Shiratake, 2020) recognize the differences and advantages between cooperative and non cooperative farmers. Most of the studies underline the economic benefits of cooperative members (Anderson, Brushett, Gray, & Renting, 2014;Falco, Smale, & Perrings, 2008;Franks & Mc Gloin, 2007;Grashuis & Su, 2019;Hovhannisyan & Vasa, 2007, 2007Larsén, 2008;Nagy & Takacs, 2001;Valentinov, 2007) by increasing their level of income and output (Fischer & Qaim, 2014;Ibezim, Okorogwe, & Ijioma, 2010;Ito, Bao, & Su, 2012;Sultana et al., 2020;Twumasi et al., 2021;Vandeplas, Minten, & Swinnen, 2013;Verhofstadt & Maertens, 2014;Wang, Cheng, Lee, Sun, & Chang, 2019), providing a secured market (Giagnocavo, Galdeano-Gómez, & Pérez-Mesa, 2018;Sultana et al., 2020), getting more access to labor, loan, tractor services, storage and processing equipment (Ajah, 2015), and improving the bargaining power of smallholders (Bijman & Hu, 2011) help minimize the risks they confront in the marketplace (Woldu, Tadesse, & Waller, 2013). Cooperative societies are also seen useful in overcoming issues such as sharing assets, data, services (Ahmed & Mesfin, 2017;Holloway, Nicholson, Delgado, Staal, & Ehui, 2000;Wossen et al., 2017) equality and caring for others are among the essential values on which authentic cooperatives and sometimes assisting farmers financially to buy equipment and seedlings for group use (Adeogun, Olawoye, & Akinbile, 2010) for high-value products. ...
As reported by the GDP per capita Kosovo is one of the poorest countries in Europe. Relying on the importance and dependence of Kosovo`s economy, it is evident that the development of agriculture sector is among the prime concern of the country`s strategy and international support programs. Several international studies assess the potential of agricultural cooperatives in transforming traditional agricultural farms to modern market-oriented business units, accelerating growth and addressing rural poverty. This research aims to analyze the relationship between socio-demographic, agricultural, and economic factors pertaining to cooperative and non-cooperative farmers in Kosovo and also shows their motivation and expectation related to agricultural practice and behavior. Primary data was collected in 2018 form 165 farmers through semi-structured questionnaires. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Chi square and T-test. The results indicated that there was a significant difference (p<0.01) between cooperative and non-cooperative farmers in various factors. Results indicated that the cooperative farmers have agricultural education, more family members are engaged in agricultural activity, have more access to seasonal employees, sharing machinery, higher readiness to invest in machinery with other farmers, and a high level of trust, they mostly operate in vegetable production and have higher income. Furthermore, the results showed differences in sales chain between two groups of farmers. The results contribute to governmental and non-governmental agencies to encourage farmers to establish/join viable cooperatives.
... Dans le cas du foncier, l'approche collective s'inscrit plutôt dans l'adhésion d'un large nombre d'agriculteurs à des pratiques bénéfiques pour l'environnement sur un même territoire pour assurer un bénéfice environnemental. Certains Etats-membres comme les Pays-Bas ont profité de l'éligibilité de groupements pour la mise en oeuvre des mesures agro-environnementales et climatiques (MAEC) et ont créé des coopératives environnementales (Franks et Gloin, 2007). En France, cette opportunité n'a pas encore été largement saisie, même si les travaux de Kuhfuss et al., (2016) montrent que des viticulteurs enquêtés dans le sud de la France expriment une préférence forte pour des mesures incluant une dimension collective. ...
In this article, we examine the contribution of farmers groups to the agroecological transition and the opportunities that the Common agricultural policy offers for their financing. To this end, we present two case studies of innovative agroecological projects that illustrate the benefits of their collective dimension. We then provide an overview of the measures that exist in the CAP 2014-2020 to support farmers groups. In addition to well-known territorial projects such as LEADER, these measures encourage the pooling of physical capital and, to a lesser extent, the pooling of work. Nevertheless, the CAP still does not provide much support for collective dynamics. Finally, we propose recommendations in terms of public policies to support collectives oriented towards agroecological transition.
... So far, very few empirical evaluations of the biodiversity impact of collective programs are available, relying on qualitative analysis [120] or modeling simulation [121]. In this regard, it is worth noting that the Dutch collective application of AECMs on the whole national territory will likely provide valuable data allowing for future policy analysis, in particular if the collective approach will be confirmed in the national Strategic Plan post-2020. ...
Agriculture is a major driver of the ongoing biodiversity decline, demanding an urgent transition towards a system that reconciles productivity and profitability with nature conservation; however, where public policies promote such transitions are in place, their design often poorly fits the relevant biogeophysical systems, decreasing the policies’ expected effectiveness. Spatial scale mismatches are a primary example in this regard. The literature reviewed in this paper, drawing from both ecology and policy studies, suggests to foster policy implementation at the landscape scale, where most functional ecological processes—and the delivery of related ecosystem services—occur on farmland. Two strategies are identified for coordinating policy implementation at the landscape scale: the promotion of farmers’ collective action and the partition of space on an ecologically sound basis through spatial planning. As the new European Union Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2023 is currently being defined, we assess if and how the draft agri-biodiversity legislation includes any of the strategies above. We find no comprehensive uptake of the landscape-scale perspective at the EU level, thereby suggesting that a powerful tool to overcome the CAP underperformance on biodiversity is being overlooked.
... Cooperatives, however, have many inherent drawbacks. The opposite aspect of the freedom and collective governance is the fairly divided socioeconomic obligations of the participants making cooperative organizations relatively dynamic while maintaining various members' demands and expectations [32,33]. While the outsourced investments are unable to contribute towards the collective, the financial viabilities and risk impacts each and every participant. ...
Environmentally friendly technologies have long been recognized as a widespread phenomenon working within the functions and performance of farms. Farmer's cooperative organization might profoundly foster the environmentally friendly technologies (EFT) and availing competitive advantage to the farmer. Illustrated by the natural-resource-based view of the farm (NRBV), this study examined the influence of organizational support, organizational norms, and organizational learning on adopting EFT and proposed a model quantifying the impacts of these approaches towards availing competitive capabilities (i.e., cost, quality, flexibility, and delivery). The framework is empirically endorsed by employing the partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) with the help of a household survey from a spectrum of 292 farmers of 38 kiwifruit cooperatives of Meixian County, China, from August to September 2020. The findings demonstrate that organizational support, organizational norms, and organizational learning positively influence EFT. Moreover, the study found EFT positively impacts product cost, product quality, product delivery, and production flexibility. Interestingly, the relationship between the adoption of environmentally friendly technologies and the competitive capabilities of kiwifruit farmers of Meixian is positively significant. The study proposes several policy recommendations emphasizing the role of organizations in the form of farmer's cooperatives in boosting farmers to engage in proenvironmental behavior and, therefore, shifting the trends of future research directions on the adoption of environmentally friendly technologies.
... Environmental Cooperatives in the Netherlands Franks and McGloin (2007) review the effectiveness of Environmental Cooperatives (EC) in delivering across-farm environmental and rural policy objectives. Although not a PBR scheme per se, the review of EC is included as an example of how collaborative action could be incorporated into PBR schemes. ...
The main aim of this report is to investigate the practical feasibility of a PBR approach in more detail and to derive generic criteria for applying the approach to agri-environment schemes within both the UK and EU. The study considers how best to develop agri-environment measures based entirely on PBR and on partial use of the concept. In reviewing sixteen selected examples of PBR schemes, specific attention is paid to the examination of the advantages and difficulties arising from the use of PBR schemes.
The report is available under Open Government Licence under the following link:
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/5275491043901440
... The results of these studies indicate that a variety of interconnected factors contribute to the promotion of environmental values among farmers and to the long-term success of these initiatives. Among other factors, the success of such schemes depends on a series of baseline social conditions and the existence of trusting relationships among participants (Church and Prokopy, 2017;Prokopy et al., 2014); the training potential of local agricultural leaders; the promotion of shared leadership between all participating organizations (Lubell, 2004;Termeer et al., 2013); the involvement of an intermediary or mediating organization (Franks and McGloin, 2007;Lubell, 2004;Prager, 2015;Wilson, 2004); and government support, especially financial and technical assistance (Termeer et al., 2013;Wilson, 2004). ...
In Canada, the Alternative Land Use Services (ALUS) program aims to support conservation projects by financially compensating farmers for ecosystem services. The program advocates a bottom-up approach that allows farmers to decide which projects to implement. In this respect, ALUS distinguishes itself from more traditional agri-environment schemes, which are often managed in a top-down fashion. Other unique features of the program include a governance structure based on stakeholder confidence; the provision of annual compensation to members for supplying ecosystem services; and a private, community-based approach to conservation. Using the proximity analysis framework, our research explores whether this model can reshape the values of farmers and encourage them to adopt and maintain environmentally friendly practices. Our results reveal a close proximity among ALUS members in terms of their values, both environmental and economic. However, the ALUS program fails to take full advantage of the geographic and organized proximity of its participants. Specifically, individual projects are not integrated into a spatially coordinated, collective strategy that could have a greater environmental impact. While ALUS has been successful in encouraging farmers to adopt new practices, it mostly attracts participants who already agree with the values it promotes. In this regard, the program is not very different from standard agri-environment schemes.
... For example, studies of environmental cooperatives in the Netherlands, and informal farmer and community collaboration in the UK, suggests that working co-operatively can yield substantial environmental benefits. 7 Co-operation puts the spotlight on shared costs and benefits, potentially including environmental 'externalities' and public goods, and highlights collective opportunities for action, for example at a landscape scale. 8 These layers of evidence build up a picture of the potential benefits of farmer co-ops, not only for their members, but for the farming industry as a whole, for farming communities and for the public. ...
Reviewing the opportunities and barriers to increased co-operation in the UK agricultural sector
... Eine andere Erfolg versprechende Möglichkeit könnte der Versuch sein, Landwirte eher als Gruppe und nicht als Individuen zu adressieren. Regionale, sozial eingebettete Organisationen, wie die Umweltkooperativen in den Niederlanden, sind auch für andere Länder als Brückenbauer und Moderator für kollektive AUKM vorgeschlagen worden (Franks und Mc Gloin 2007;Burton und Paragahawewa 2011;Mills 2012). Solche lokalen Organisationen könnten bei ihren Mitgliedern ein Gefühl des sozialen Drucks wachrufen, etwas für den Naturschutz zu tun, ihnen aber auch das Gefühl vermitteln, dass sie bei ihren Naturschutzanstrengungen unterstützt werden (van Dijk et al. 2015). ...
Dieses Kapitel zeigt auf, dass eine institutionelle Pfadabhängigkeit der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik der Europäischen Union zu einer historisch verfestigten Sonderstellung des Agrarsektors geführt hat. In der Folge dominieren einkommenspolitische Ziele die Agrarpolitik. Natur- und Umweltschutzanliegen bleiben randständig und müssen vorwiegend mit ordnungsrechtlichen Mitteln durchgesetzt werden. Dabei bestehen Regelungs- und Implementationsdefizite, oft infolge von Ausnahmeregelungen für die Landwirtschaft. Handlungsdruck könnte sich jedoch aus drei neueren Entwicklungen des Rechtsrahmens ergeben: der Einbeziehung der bislang separaten Agrarmarktordnungen in die allgemeinen Regelungen des EU-Binnenmarkts, den haftungsrechtlichen Folgen der Verbraucherschutzstandards entlang der Wertschöpfungsketten sowie aus transnationalen privatrechtlichen Standards. Anregungen für eine Weiterentwicklung der Governance-Ansätze geben neue Konzepte wie Resilienz und adaptives Management sowie verhaltenswissenschaftliche Ansätze.
... Eine andere Erfolg versprechende Möglichkeit könnte der Versuch sein, Landwirte eher als Gruppe und nicht als Individuen zu adressieren. Regionale, sozial eingebettete Organisationen, wie die Umweltkooperativen in den Niederlanden, sind auch für andere Länder als Brückenbauer und Moderator für kollektive AUKM vorgeschlagen worden (Franks und Mc Gloin 2007;Burton und Paragahawewa 2011;Mills 2012). Solche lokalen Organisationen könnten bei ihren Mitgliedern ein Gefühl des sozialen Drucks wachrufen, etwas für den Naturschutz zu tun, ihnen aber auch das Gefühl vermitteln, dass sie bei ihren Naturschutzanstrengungen unterstützt werden (van Dijk et al. 2015). ...
Dieses Kapitel stellt eine Analyse der Stärken, Schwächen, Chancen und Risiken der gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik der EU aus Sicht des Natur- und Umweltschutzes vor. Das Ergebnis ist ambivalent: Einerseits bildet die Gemeinsame Agrarpolitik einen stabilen institutionellen Rahmen mit guter Finanzausstattung und vielen umweltpolitischen Instrumenten. Andererseits führen die Dominanz agrarpolitischer Akteure, Status-quo-Denken und geringe Beteiligungsmöglichkeiten zur systematischen Schwächung der natur- und umweltpolitischen Ansätze, zu Regelungs- und Vollzugsdefiziten, mangelnder Datenlage sowie geringer Effektivität und Effizienz. Chancen entstehen aus der Etablierung von Tierwohl, Natur-, Umwelt- und Verbraucherschutz als Legitimationsgrundlage für die Agrarzahlungen, aus europarechtlichen Anforderungen an ein hohes Schutzniveau im Binnenmarkt, aus einem erheblichen öffentlichen Mobilisierungspotenzial sowie aus technischen Entwicklungen. Finanzpolitische und internationale Verteilungskämpfe, politische Polarisierung und Radikalisierung sowie nachteilige Veränderungen der Agrarökosysteme, nicht zuletzt durch menschliche Einwirkung, sind wichtige Risiken.
... Eine andere Erfolg versprechende Möglichkeit könnte der Versuch sein, Landwirte eher als Gruppe und nicht als Individuen zu adressieren. Regionale, sozial eingebettete Organisationen, wie die Umweltkooperativen in den Niederlanden, sind auch für andere Länder als Brückenbauer und Moderator für kollektive AUKM vorgeschlagen worden (Franks und Mc Gloin 2007;Burton und Paragahawewa 2011;Mills 2012). Solche lokalen Organisationen könnten bei ihren Mitgliedern ein Gefühl des sozialen Drucks wachrufen, etwas für den Naturschutz zu tun, ihnen aber auch das Gefühl vermitteln, dass sie bei ihren Naturschutzanstrengungen unterstützt werden (van Dijk et al. 2015). ...
Dieses Kapitel diskutiert die verschiedenen Instrumente der Agrarpolitik im Hinblick auf ihren Beitrag zur Realisierung des Leitbilds einer multifunktionalen, natur- und umweltverträglichen Landwirtschaft: Ordnungsrecht und gesetzliche Mindeststandards für die landwirtschaftliche Praxis, Budgetausstattung und -aufteilung, flächenbezogene Direktzahlungen, regional und standörtlich ausgerichtete Zahlungen, Zusammenspiel mit nicht-staatlichen Standards und öffentlich-privater Ko-Regulierung, Monitoring- und Sanktionssysteme, sowie unterstützende Elemente wie Beratung und verbraucherorientierte Maßnahmen. Die Analyse zeigt, dass bei jedem Element der Agrarpolitik verschiedene Instrumenten-Varianten mehr oder weniger zur Verwirklichung des Leitbildes beitragen. Nur eine Kombination aller Bausteine kann die verschiedenen agrarpolitischen Problemkomplexe lösen. Ein guter Politikansatz erfordert dabei sowohl ein überzeugendes Gesamtkonzept als auch eine geeignete Ausgestaltung der einzelnen Instrumente.
... In this context, several authors emphasise the roles and opportunities of collective action and collaborative community initiatives for sustainable landscape management (e.g., Enengel et al. 2011, Prager et al. 2012, Hernández-Morcillo et al. 2017, Leach et al. 1999, García-Martín et al. 2016, Scherr et al. 2013. Frequently mentioned benefits of such approaches include the following: tackling challenges and opportunities for landscape stewardship more effectively and pro-actively compared with single actors (Scherr et al. 2013); the emergence of creative solutions (Fadeeva 2005); sharing and mobilising resources (Cong et al. 2014); negotiating and harmonising conflicting objectives; building capacity and social capital, resulting in mutual appreciation and support (Prager et al. 2012(Prager et al. , 2015; increased knowledge exchange and communication; and engagement with the landscape and countryside (Franks and McGloin 2007). In sum, collaborative approaches are widely acknowledged to support landscape management because they are adaptive and can be tailored to site-specific conditions. ...
Traditional cultural landscapes are of special value not only for reasons of nature conservation and high species diversity but also because they intersect with the identity of local communities, support recreation and tourism, and preserve cultural heritage. Structural changes in rural areas threaten these unique sceneries and environments in Europe and worldwide. As a result, the question of how to maintain and manage cultural landscapes where economic benefits are not assured has become a priority in science and in practice. Considering this context, community-based collaborative landscape management (CLM) can be considered an innovative and promising approach. This paper presents results from a stakeholder analysis examining the preconditions and opportunities for initiating a CLM in the biosphere reserve known as ‘Spreewald’. The results indicate that due to the type of problem (landscape change)—which is characterised by complexity, beneficial linkages to a multitude of actor groups, and broad problem awareness—CLM appears to be feasible. However, other preconditions related to social relationships among actor groups, questions of legitimate coordination and the collaborative capacity of the community are not met, thus reducing the likelihood of success. To address these challenges, we discuss the potential of transdisciplinary processes (TD) to assist local communities in establishing such a collaborative problem-solving and management approach. We show that TD is highly valuable and supportive during this critical stage of emerging collaboration.
... However, some attitudes may be more amenable to change. This includes attitudes to collective participation schemes, which have been found to have greater environmental benefit (Kuhfuss et al., 2016;Franks & Mc Gloin, 2007). In this case, positive incentives and experiences may be able to affect the underlying attitude and therefore the final rate of uptake. ...
EKLIPSE has published the report, annexes and press release on Understanding farmer uptake of measures that support biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
... The international literature highlights several advantages cooperation may bring about. These may be classified under three main categories: most sources underline the economic benefits arising from cooperatives [10][11][12], while the past decade has seen a rise in the number of studies that shed light on the social [13][14][15][16], and environmental advantages [17][18][19] that result from collaboration. The cooperation of growers in the agriculture economies, with structural and efficiency problems [20] can be especially influential to the achievement of goals of sustainable development. ...
This research aims to determine the demographic and economic factors affecting agriculture cooperation activity in Kosovo. Primary data was collected from 249 farmers in Kosovo through structured questionnaires using the random sampling technique. The results show that the level of cooperation among farmers in Kosovo is low due to the lack of trust in the cooperative institutions. The binary logistic regression analysis used in the study shows that location, gender, age, education level, trust, and farm size have significantly influenced the cooperation activity. Findings also highlight that the farmers who live in rural areas, as well as those who are young and have got a higher level of education and trust, show a higher level of activity associated with cooperation, whereas farms managed by (older) men with lower level of education are less likely to cooperate. Estimation indicates that medium sized farms show a high level of cooperation, which can be statistically verified, and only the type of farming has nonsignificant influence in cooperation.
... Relevant literature on the topic highlights a number of advantages cooperation may bring about. These may be classified under three main categories: most sources underline the economic benefits arising from cooperatives [Franks, McGloin 2007, Valentinov 2007, Di Falco et al. 2008 Despite all its undisputable benefits, empirical evidence shows that the opportunities inherent in cooperation have not yet been exploited in most european union member states and this is especially true of younger members such as Hungary [Bijman et al. 2012, COGECA 2015. Formal cooperation primarily includes collaborations regulated by written contract in accordance with existing legal provisions (e.g. ...
The present study attempts to identify factors that influence the readiness of Hungarian agricultural producers’ to effectively and efficiently cooperate with each other. Analyses based on the binomial logistic regression method have revealed a clear correlation between activities conducive to cooperation, the demographics of producers, farming conditions and the level of trust. Findings highlight that producers who live in smaller rural settlements as well as those who are younger and have a higher level of educational attainment show a higher level of activity associated with cooperation that can be statistically justified whereas farms managed by women are less inclined to cooperate. Calculations indicate that as the size of holdings increases, their readiness for cooperation increases too, while in terms of the type of farming, crop farmers are more open to cooperate effectively than livestock farmers. Finally, this model has revealed a significant positive correlation between producers’ readiness to cooperate and their level of trust.
... The Netherlandsa country much vaunted for its history of cooperative agricultural relationsis one of the few areas to have longer-term experiences of agri-environmental collaboration, with Environmental Cooperatives (EC) existing since the 1990s. Whilst the reported advantages of ECs include a strengthening of farmers' voices in the design and implementation of schemes (van Dijk et al., 2015) and potentially lower transaction costs (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007), challenges have included a lack of observable 'outcomes' or 'results' which serve to reduce the initial enthusiasm of some participants; a lack of professional knowledgeat least at the time of inceptionparticularly relating to specific environmental management; and legal arrangements being particularly challenging to coordinate (Glasbergen, 2000). Prager and Vanclay (2010) consider the 'Landcare' groups in Germany (through comparison with their Australian namesake)which develop collaborations drawing on AES fundingand note the positive outcome of fostering clearer communication between farmers and environment experts, something echoed in Reed et al.'s (2014) reflection on the Common Grazing option in the Welsh Glastir Scheme, which saw farmers working collectively in undertaking grazing and capital works on common land. ...
There is growing concern that Agri-environment Schemes (AESs) may not be effective in conserving the countryside. Particular concern has arisen around whether the current approach of individual, farm-level, AES agreements are sufficient to offer landscape-scale environmental protection and enhancement. Whilst recent additions to AESs have sought to encourage more joined-up thinking by offering payments to farmers to form collective agreements, uptake is low and there is very little known about farmers' (non)resistance to such collective conservation. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research with 74 farms across 5 sites in the UK, this paper provides new data on the barriers to farmers' uptake of collective AESs and offers a new formulation of how we understand farming cooperation. The paper advances Bourdieusian-inspired ideas of the cultural construct of 'good farming' by synthesising these with recent reconceptualizations of 'trust' in order to provide a more contextually grounded and temporally-inflected understanding of farmers' cooperative activities. The findings reveal that whilst working relations between farmers are often collegiate, and in places collective, several watershed events over past decades have led to a shift from community-level to process-based (peer-to-peer) trust and a move toward land management being depicted as a squarely individual rather than collective issue. Conceptually, the paper moves beyond the current limitation of viewing trust, and the associated development of social capital - seen as a prerequisite for more collective AESs - as cumulative and one-directional to highlighting their multiple, issue-specific, nature which may become eroded and (re)developed over time. Alongside this, the paper offers a new way of understanding the good farmer by shifting the focus from the individual farm/farmer level to a more fine-grained and contextualised issue-centered notion of good farming. This is then used to explain the seeming reluctance of land holders, evidenced in official statistics, to engage in collective AESs.
... Greiber (2009). 151 See Franks (2008), Franks and Mc Gloin (2007a), and Franks and Mc Gloin (2007b). Even if there are less recent, it is interest to confront with Renting and van der Ploeg (2001) and Wiskerke et al. (2003). ...
Several agri-environmental schemes have been implemented in the last 20 years in Europe. In general, such measures are designed to encourage farmers to protect and enhance the environment through managing agricultural activity, by rewarding farmers for the service of implementing agri-environment commitments. In recent years, the European Union is showing an increasing interest for identifying more cost-effective means of paying for ecosystem services. An option under consideration is the implementation of results-based schemes, where farmers are rewarded not for performing activity-based standards but for achieving set environmental outcomes. From early 1990s, results-based schemes have slowly been increasing in number and scope, even if the majority remains located in northwestern Europe. The paper is aimed at increasing the legal understanding of results-based agri-environmental scheme for the delivery of ecosystem services. It explores the legal emerging concept of results-based measures and the issues that arise when they are put into practice. In conclusion, the paper distils what can be learned in terms of scaling up the implementation of results-based agri-environmental measures for the enhancement of ecosystem services in the EU.
... A poor understanding of the social aspects of utilization of rangelands limits their proper management ( Dong et al. 2009) and de- celerates the achievement of their sustainable development. Participa- tion is a remarkable issue in environmental studies, policies, and schemes (Pellizzoni and Ungaro 2000;Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Lubell et al. 2013). Concentrating on the use of participatory approaches in natural resource management (NRM) started in the 1930s ( Garforth and Maarse, 1988;Lyden et al. 1990). ...
The highly centralized management of rangelands in northwest Iran has caused their degradation. Rangeland Management Cooperatives (RMCs) have been taken into account by the Iranian researchers and practitioners as the best mode of managing and tackling these resources. In this regard, stakeholders’ participation (i.e., the rangers) in such institutions is a substantial issue because without their close collaboration, any management scheme is likely to fail or succeed partially. Therefore, this study investigates the rangers’ participation in RMCs using the theory-triangulation method. We developed the main research question: how the explanatory variables, extracted from the social-psychological models, influence rangers’ participation in RMCs. A sample of 200 rangers participated in the survey method, of which we received 179 completed self-reported questionnaires. The reliability of the questionnaire was calculated using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Kuder-Richardson 21, the metrics that measure the consistency of items in indicator variables with the interval and binary scales, respectively. The results of path analysis unveil that job satisfaction and progressivism have a direct effect on participation, and the improved economic conditions of industries developed by the RMCs, good intrarelation, fatalism, progressivism, optimism, and cost-benefit indirectly influence participation via job satisfaction. On the basis of these results, it is concluded that to increase rangers’ participation in RMCs, which is a key factor in preventing the degradation of rangelands, RMCs’ officials need to improve the local industries benefiting from the rangelands and upgrade intracommunication skills via training. It is also suggested that all rangers, even those with fatalistic beliefs, need to be included in RMCs’ participatory activities. Finally, it is needed to assess progressivist rangers’ needs, promote optimism, and visualize the economic, social, and conservation benefits of the participation in RMCs.
... In rural areas where private businesses hesitate to go and public authorities do not provide basic services, cooperatives play a major self-help role. They give a stronger voice to rural groups and provide opportunities for productive employment as well as offering health care, education, potable water, improved sanitation, roads, and market access (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007;Henry and Schimmel, 2011). ...
Rural cooperatives, as a small member-owned organizations, are the potential to facilitate socioeconomic development in rural areas. Despite this fact, in Iran and many other developing countries, they have not had remarkable successes in this regard. Because strategy formulation and management is a plan to obtain far-reaching development effects of any organization. This study aimed to present a hybrid method to formulate and choose strategies for rural cooperatives development. It combined SWOT analysis, TOWS matrix, and the Analytic Network Process (ANP). We applied brainstorming technique to analyze the external and internal environment of rural cooperatives using the contributions of an experts' team comprising 10 individual CEOs of rural cooperatives and senior employees of the Central Organization of Rural Cooperatives. When this team identified key SWOT factors, TOWS matrix was constructed to create good strategic alternatives. Finally, ANP was applied to prioritize the strategies. According to results, 19 key strategic factors such as lack of management knowledge (W4), and ability to improve value and supply chains (S4) were identified. In addition, this team identified 11 strategic alternatives which among them Implement public policy and provide technical and financial services (SO2), Facilitate procurement of inputs and develop supply and value chains (SO1) and Involve rural cooperatives in policy planning (ST1), had greater priority in Iran. The experts' team believed that the presented combined approach helps decision makers and managers to make and choose the best alternative strategies and factors that affect rural cooperatives development.
... Steingröver et al., 2010). In particular, CAP at the EU level allows for the possibility of collaborative management and good practice examples are emerging, particularly in the Netherlands, demonstrating benefits to farmers and biodiversity (Franks and Mc Gloin, 2007). However, such examples are isolated and relate to voluntary pillar 2 schemes, meaning that there is no compulsion to collaborate. ...
We argue that the current system of agri-environment management in the European Common Agricultural Policy is ineffective at conserving biodiversity in part because it promotes fragmentation insteadd of collaboration of actors, thus hindering coordinated biodiversity management. Actor fragmentation is reinforced by the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in three ways: (1) through targeting individual farmers; (2) by creating confusion around coordination roles for increasing numbers of actors; and (3) by failing to engage with barriers to collaboration among farmers. Our findings draw on empirical evidence collected through multi-stakeholder workshops in Germany and Sweden. Our argument adds a different dimension to accepted explanations for the ineffectiveness of CAP for biodiversity management. Traditionally, explanations have focussed on low levels of farmer uptake of relevant measures, or the lack of ecological knowledge informing such measures. The level of actor fragmentation identified here suggests that a fundamental rethink of farmland biodiversity management is needed. We propose a new research agenda to identify more effective governance approaches.
... This is one of the reasons for disappointing results (RLI, 2013). The negotiation skills of the LEC and its reputation in the area are evidently crucial to achieve a high participation rate (Franks and McGloin, 2007a). Although the LEC can take care of part of the work concerned with submissions and reporting, the Collective Management Plans so far come with much bureaucracy for participants as a result of the high level of detail in which measures are described and controlled by the government. ...
In trying to influence spatial development, people engage in discussions about distinctions between places or areas, and the roles of government and society, while they need to relate to other groups of stakeholders. In other words, boundaries (between meanings of places, between government and society, and between different groups of people) are omnipresent in spatial governance. Does the peri-urban area belong to the city or to the countryside? Can nature be integrated into farming? What should be the role of governments in relation to bottom-up initiatives? And how can people collaborate in spite of their differences in background, culture and knowledge? People have devised various tools and strategies to deal with boundaries. This study investigates those boundary arrangements in practices of spatial governance, such as boundary concepts, boundary organisations and social learning. They are often combined for a more effective boundary management, because as a rule multiple boundaries are relevant.
... In this sense, the development of collective initiatives such as environmental co-operatives opens up interesting questions about more participative forms of AEG or 'selfgovernance' practices (e.g. Franks and Mc Gloin 2007;Glasbergen 2000). As highlighted by these studies, one of the positive effects of farmers' collaboration over environmental actions is related to scale, as many environmental issues are better addressed at the scale of an entire landscape rather than at the level of individual farms. ...
Attempts of making our food systems more sustainable have (partly) failed. Food production still contributes significantly to biodiversity losses, global warming and depletion of natural resources. Based on the postulation that this failure in the governance of environmental issues in agri-food systems relates notably to social and cultural aspects, this paper explores the literature in the social sciences looking for explanations. A first statement is that research around agri-environmental governance (AEG) issues remains globally split into two subgroups, one focusing on public policies and the other on the civil society or market aspects of environmental certification, with very little exchange or transversal analysis between the two. Drawing on the literature and on long-term fieldwork and research in Switzerland, I identify three dimensions of AEG that open new paths towards more sustainable food systems: an encompassing approach of the food system; the encouragement of collective knowledge creation and the promotion of autonomy. Joining other emerging scholarships, this paper calls for developments in the research on AEG that produce encompassing theoretical frameworks, which transcends pre-existing categories in order to allow new conceptualisation of governance practices in complex or hybrid systems. The integration of the food, knowledge and autonomy dimensions should help in creating innovative and transformative governance instruments.
Rural cooperatives as a small member-owned organizations are the potential to facilitate socio-economic development in rural areas. This study presents a novel hybrid method to develop strategies for development of rural cooperatives. It combines SWOT analysis, TOWS strategic alternatives matrix, and the analytic network process (ANP). SWOT was used to analyze the external and internal environment of rural cooperatives in Iran using the contributions of a team of experts. This team identified 19 SWOT sub-factors. A TOWS matrix was then constructed and the internal and external environmental sub-factors were combined to create good strategic alternatives. The expert team used the TOWS matrix to identify 11 strategic alternatives. ANP was applied to prioritize the strategic alternatives. According to the experts’ team, the presented combined approach helps managers to choose the best alternative strategies considering both internal and environmental factors.
This report explores the existing evidence relating to long-term agreements (LTAs) in agriculture and conservation, before examining the extent and state of private and blended investment. Specifically, it explores how agreements have been structured and the payment mechanisms that have accompanied them. Additionally, the report considers how private investment into long-term agreements may be secured, and the barriers and opportunities that arise in blended finance arrangements.
This report contributes to answering the following policy questions:
• How to construct long-term agreements (30+ years), potentially incorporating
conservation covenants, to safeguard investments in land use change and associated
environmental outcomes?
• How to blend public and private finance in funding projects?
The provision of ecosystem services (ES) in agricultural landscapes depends, inter alia, on agricultural production, and can therefore be influenced by governance. To capture the impacts of governance on ES via agriculture, we proposed and tested an analytical framework – based on agricultural location theory – to describe possible agricultural impact pathways. These pathways show how different governance approaches (e.g. hierarchical, market-based, collaborative, and their hybrids) influence site and farm conditions, which in turn influence agricultural production practices and thus ES provision. The framework was applied to three European case study regions in the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria. The sub-objectives were: i) to identify regional governance approaches and assess how well they reflect the regional specifics, as a basis for applying the framework; and, by applying the framework, to: ii) investigate how these governance approaches then differ in their agricultural impact pathways and thus effects on agriculture; and iii) evaluate their respective influence on ES provision. The governance approaches were compiled and analysed from several sources, e.g. legal documents and grey literature from regional sources, regional workshops, and consultation with stakeholders. The analyses showed that different governance types indeed differ in how well they accommodate regional specifics in their agricultural impact pathways, and thus in their influence on agriculture and ES provision. Overall, the analytical framework is suited to highlighting the agricultural perspective in the ES concept and to exploring the constraints and opportunities for farmers to adopt agricultural production practices that favour the provision of ES as environmental public goods.
The influence of social media trends in the current world has significantly impacted the fashion industry. Hence, the rise of the Islamic fashion culture has expanded to Western countries, which no longer consider Islamic fashion to be dull and boring. Islamic fashion was also constantly misjudged, even by Muslims, as the idea of covering the body and head with a veil or hijab and wearing body-hugging clothes with a bit of exposed hair is accepted as Islamic wear. This indicated a shift of perspective from a conservative to modern culture in Islamic attire, with a lack of understanding of the difference between the two concepts. Therefore, this study identifies the comparison between the
Islamic dress code and modest fashion. The analysis performed used the literature review of previous studies over five years, between 2015 and 2020, using databases from Google Scholar and Scopus. However, only 15 articles were discussed in this study. The review of past literature was based on the crucial keywords related to this study. Modest fashion, the Islamic dress code, and Islamic fashion in Malaysia was the focus
of the keywords research. The study revealed an understanding of the Islamic dress code among past researchers, as Muslims acknowledged the concept of aurah in dressing. Modest fashion, on the other hand, was seen as another fashion movement referring to Muslims, with a combination of religious symbols and modern trends in mainstream clothing brands, together with the marketing strategies of local brand
development focusing on the Muslim demographics. The extent to which a dressing style follows the laws of Syariah, or fits the modern culture, or a combination of both, depending on the individual. As such, this study intends to clarify both the concepts for a better understanding of Islamic wear and modest fashion.
In the European Union (EU) context, regulatory instruments and incentive schemes targeting individual farms remain the main policy instruments implemented to control diffuse pollution from agriculture. Yet, collective approaches to policy implementation have been recently developing. This article aims at assessing the potential for hybrid policy instruments relying on collective action among farmers to limit diffuse nitrate pollution from agriculture. Transaction cost economics are used to assess the potential advantages of collective action as a complement to regulatory and incentive policy tools. The conditions under which such hybrid forms of governance may be successful are identified using the Social-Ecological System (SES) framework. A review of empirical studies documenting cases of collective action for policy implementation in the EU context serves as a basis for the identification of the factors likely to affect the potential of collective approaches for water quality management in agriculture. The analysis relies more particularly on two cases: the Environmental Cooperatives in the Netherlands and the “Ferti-Mieux” operations in France. The results suggest that collective action is a relevant tool to consider for improving the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of policies targeting diffuse pollution from agriculture. In particular, relying on farmers’ cooperation for policy implementation may be associated with advantages in terms of transaction costs. However, such advantages will be effective under a number of conditions related to the characteristics of the water resource, the actors involved, the governance of cooperation and the broader economic and institutional contexts.
Rural cooperatives as a small member-owned organizations are the potential to facilitate socioeconomic development in rural areas. This study presents a novel hybrid method to develop strategies for development of rural cooperatives. It combines SWOT analysis, TOWS strategic alternatives matrix, and the analytic network process (ANP). SWOT was used to analyze the external and internal environment of rural cooperatives in Iran using the contributions of a team of experts. This team identified 19 SWOT sub-factors. A TOWS matrix was then constructed and the internal and external environmental sub-factors were combined to create good strategic alternatives. The expert team used the TOWS matrix to identify 11 strategic alternatives. ANP was applied to prioritize the strategic alternatives. According to the experts' team, the presented combined approach helps managers to choose the best alternative strategies considering both internal and environmental factors.
Organisations of land managers in landscape management face the challenge of combining the need to foster bonding social capital within their member groups with the need to develop bridging social capital with other stakeholders and linking social capital with public authorities. This paper compares the concepts of self-governing groups, boundary organisations and quangos, to analyse how agri-environmental collectives in the Netherlands navigate their identity in interactions with public authorities and manage potential trade-offs between different forms of social capital. It shows the paradoxical situation that these self-governing collectives have to adopt characteristics of public agencies, in order to meet the demands of the Dutch government and EU legislation, required to gain the trust of the authorities for more room for self-governance. The resulting ‘professionalization’ and enlargement of agri-environmental collectives is likely to reduce bonding social capital, which in turn is an important asset for effective landscape management. In order to prevent this counterproductive incentive of expecting self-governing groups to behave like public agencies, we recommend to nourish and protect the in-between identity of agri-environmental collectives, to acknowledge their variety, and to allow them to be self-governing groups as well as boundary organisations.
Since the establishment of one of the early co-operatives in Western Europe in the 1800s, co-operatives in the Western world have developed exponentially and played essential roles in improving agricultural sustainability. Much research has been carried out on this topic; however, to date, there is no systematic review of this body of the literature. To fill this gap, this paper is designed to identify the main research themes regarding agricultural co-operatives in western countries, and subsequently shed light on avenues for future research in this field. Based on a systematic literature review with bibliometric techniques including citation and co-citation analyses, this study identifies six predominant themes (the social and environmental performance of cooperatives, the governance structures and performance of co-operatives, trust and commitment in co-operatives, comparisons between co-operatives and investor-owned firms (IOFs), financing problems in co-operatives, and women co-operatives) of debates on western co-operatives. Recommendations for future research are finally provided.
This study examines the differences in economic performance between the early and late adopters of organic farming practice in Taiwan. The Fuli township in Hualian, Taiwan, serves as the research population to the testing of the first-mover (dis)advantages for the organic rice market. A theoretical model describing farm household's farming practice adoption decision is proposed to guide the empirical investigation. The empirical results indicate early adopters are mainly motivated by attitude towards environment and health, whereas the late adopters are most concerned with the economic effects of organic farming. The result suggests that the early adopters are committed organic while the late adopters are more of the pragmatic ones. Within the context of the counterfactual causal inference framework, this study further identifies the differential economic outcomes for the two groups of organic farmers. Estimates of the average treatment effect and the parametric test statistics unanimously support the first-mover disadvantages or follower advantages since the late adopters significantly outperform their early counterparts.
There is a growing perception that social enterprises represent a significant solution to the range of contemporary challenges facing rural areas across Europe. However, while much of the existing studies of European rural social enterprises provide a rich insight into specific case studies, as of yet, there is no comprehensive review of the breadth of research currently published on rural social enterprises in Europe. We respond to this gap by providing a systematic literature review incorporating 66 studies of rural social enterprise in Europe. We highlight the range of research in this field and demonstrate how the organisations act as key actors in fulfilling needs of rural areas that are not met otherwise. This systematic literature review confirms that rural social enterprises are characterised by strong local involvement with an ability to combine different goals and resources. Based on this review, we suggest that the rural and local contexts, often combined with tailored external support, are important factors in enabling rural social enterprises. This review also indicates that the academic field is relatively young and rapidly growing, leaving room for new lines of potential research to improve our understanding of these enterprises and their contribution to the development of rural places.
This study reviews the evolution of environmental land management and agri-environment schemes (AES) offered to farmers in England between 1979 and 2015 from the perspective of their potential to deliver landscape-scale, i.e. cross farm boundary, environmental benefits. The review uses population conservation theory, which underpinned the recommendations in the Lawton report (Lawton et al., 2010), to identify eight characteristics of these schemes with this potential. These characteristics form a framework which is used to assess the potential landscape-scale impacts of Countryside Stewardship, the AES recently introduced in England. The Mid Tier of Countryside Stewardship provides financial assistance to facilitators to help farmers organise and manage Farmer Groups. A Farmer Group must consist of four or more neighbouring farmers, who between them farm over 2,000 ha. Each member of a Farmer Group is required to submit an individual application, but each application must demonstrate that it “go[es] beyond [the environmental benefits that] could be delivered by individual holdings acting in isolation”. After the 2017 round, 98 Farmer Groups had been funded, involving 1915 farmer members, covering 451,064 ha. Primarily because of this innovation, Countryside Stewardship is considered to be the most landscape-scale orientated AES offered to farmers in England. A consideration of the evolution towards landscape-scale attributes in environmental land management schemes leads into a discussion of how future changes to four key AES characteristics – identified in the review – may influence how the landscape-scale dimension develops in the next generation of AES.
Improving the dynamic relationship between nature and human well-being is a pressing issue of our time. Landscapes embody this tight interconnectedness and serve as unique sustainability learning hubs, showcased by the global rise of place-based and holistic landscape stewardship initiatives. Incorporating these exciting developments, this book explores the principles of landscape stewardship and their function in fields such as agriculture, ecological restoration and urban green infrastructure. It provides insights into the challenges and the potential of landscape stewardship and identifies future paths for the science and practice of landscape-related sustainability efforts. Aligning analytical perspectives with practical applications, it brings together contributions from leading scholars and innovative models of landscape stewardship from all around the world, making it an essential resource for anyone interested in developing sustainable human-nature relationships.
This paper draws attention to the neglected sociological concept of authority, arguing that fresh attention to authority, and its relationship with legitimacy, is needed to extend our understanding of the practices and outcomes of rural governance. However, the foundational theory of authority needs updating to recognise the multiple modes of authority and attention should be paid to how they are enacted, by whom and in what circumstances. The paper updates debates on whether there is a missing category beyond Weber's traditional tripartite distinction between traditional, charismatic and legal-rational authority. The paper uses empirical evidence from a five year ethnographic study of the development and implementation of a strategic National Park Plan to explore what is meant by an ‘enabling Authority’ and the difficulties experienced. The results suggest that a portfolio of modes of legitimate authority are enacted, drawing attention to how authority and legitimacy are more complex and hybrid than the foundational theory suggests. The tensions in utilising multiple sources of authority speak to wider discussions about rural governance of multi-functional spaces and places.
EU agriculture and rural areas face significant medium-term challenges arising from existing and ‘new’ sources; as acknowledged in the EU2020 vision. The European Commission has placed emphasis upon innovation as a key element in achieving transformation, in the coming decade. Findings from a recent study for the European Parliament highlight the potential role of Pillar 2 rural development pro- grammes as vehicles for enabling innovation. Key roles include supporting knowledge exchange; collaboration; and research-into-practice linkages. Effective knowledge exchange (KE) is a critical element, but innovation in KE itself is often needed. Collaboration can be valuable in fostering cross-sectoral linkages, and communities of learning show innovation potential. Integration of measures in tailored packages appears to increase the scope for innovation. Equally important, there is a vital need for innovation in policy design and delivery, to enable a cost-effective transformation of agriculture and rural areas. The CAP proposals 2014-2020 make a positive contri- bution to better promote innovation through Pillar 2, but there is room for improvement. Models for policy innovation adapted from experience in commercial organisations are suggested as worthy of further research.
Cooperatives offer many advantages as a model for development of specialist agri-food businesses in rural areas. They allow groups of people to work together and build expertise, and are large enough to compete with private and multinational businesses. Here we report research that was carried out in Wales, UK, and which sought to identify the characteristics of rural, agri-food cooperatives. The empirical research highlighted significant rural conflicts, cooperation difficulties and failure which we document and theorise next. The research isolated select few issues that impede rural cooperation and highlighted factors that need to be in place for a rural, agri-food cooperative to be sustainable and successful and for cooperation to flourish. Rural cooperation problems and difficulties that were identified included weak loyalty, distrust, opportunistic and ‘devious’ behaviours on the part of members and other stakeholders. Lack of professional management, inadequate marketing and branding expertise were also distinguished as key determinants of the high failure rate of start-up cooperatives in Wales. Cooperatives which did not involve trading operations, such as knowledge transfer organisations, business clubs and show societies, appeared more sustainable and resilient.
The chapter provides a review of examples of collective agri-environmental initiatives that have been developed in Australia and in some European countries (Germany, the Netherlands), by showing their relevance in the current policy and academic debate. Although the cases described cannot always be classified as collective actions, an analysis of their main features provides some insights into the potentialities and barriers to implementing collaborative agri-environmental schemes in different contexts. Moreover, these examples reflect the complexity of the different agricultural and forestry practices as well as the difficult challenge of tailoring the collective strategies to local and regional needs. The final part of the chapter focuses on the main policy and institutional challenges for developing and supporting more grass roots collective actions for public goods, by providing a short overview of the Italian case studies that are analyzed in more depth in chapter 4 (the project Custody of the Territory in Tuscany Region) and in chap. 5 (the agri-environmental agreement in Marche Region).
The Fischler reforms are introduced and considered from the perspective of livestock farming in the North East of England. The dependency of livestock farming on the previous subsidy system is shown. In England the Single Farm Payment (SFP) has been "decoupled" from production: farmers will receive it providing they satisfy cross-compliance conditions. This research suggests that many farmers will, at least initially, have to use their SFP to support their farm businesses (i.e.support will in effect remain coupled). For how long they will need to do this is an open question as it principally depends on input and output market prices (which are difficult to estimate) and their commitment to farming.
A whole landscape approach is critical to ensuring conservation and enhancement of biodiversity in farmed landscapes. Although existing agri-environmental schemes are constrained by property boundaries and voluntary take up, the potential for adopting a whole landscape approach to planned countryside management is currently favoured by a number of factors. These include economic uncertainty in some agricultural sectors; the introduction of a reformulated rural development policy; increased understanding of relationships between biodiversity and management; and the introduction of Geographical Information Systems technology that allows future landscapes to be visualised to stakeholders. We report on ecological and socio-economic aspects of whole landscape planning in a study covering 31 neighbouring farms in west Oxfordshire. A baseline was first compiled that included information on property boundaries; land cover; relationships between hedge and field margin management and key taxa; and farmer socio-economics and attitudes towards agri-environmental measures, conservation and sustainable agriculture. We then developed future scenarios of integrated whole landscapes management, designed to deliver amenity, environmental and biodiversity benefits. These scenarios were presented and interpreted to farmers, conservation and amenity stakeholders with the aid of GIS-based maps and three dimensional virtual reality visualisations. We report farmers responses and discuss the potential for implementing whole landscape planning.
Agricultural policy in Europe is changing from supporting production to encouraging environmental benefits in the context of sustainable rural development. As a result, there is a window of opportunity to reconsider the balance between agricultural production and biodiversity management on British farmland, to seek to redress the problems for biodiversity that accrued during intensification without reducing the capacity to meet the coming challenges of global change and population increase. These challenges are discussed in the context of longer term historical change, and in terms of how readily they can be overcome. Current policies can deliver conservation targets that are within the control of individual land managers, and are likely to increase landscape heterogeneity significantly. However, it will be more dif. cult to plan landscapes to deliver agricultural production, ecosystem services and conserve biodiversity in the face of nutrient deposition and climate change. There can be no theoretical “optimum” balance between production and biodiversity, as environmental goals depend greatly upon decisions about scales (from local to global, immediate to long) and the viewpoints of stakeholders. Indeed, the social challenge of delivering sustainable agricultural landscapes is far greater than the scientific one of researching what they might be like.
In this paper the case of the environmental co-operatives VEL and VANLA is reviewed in terms of coevolving technical and institutional change and the strategic lessons to be learned for a pro-active management of such complex technical-institutional design processes. Facing the many-sided crisis in agriculture the two co-operatives developed a radically different approach. The aim is to re-ground agriculture in local agro-ecological processes following the approach of lowering external inputs (i.e., material inputs, capital and labour). The results are promising: a system-innovation is emerging out of a wide range of connected novel operational practices (i.e., novelties) including technical as well as institutional aspects. The findings of VEL and VANLA stress once again the need for a simultaneous redesign of technical and institutional change to facilitate a transition towards a more sustainable agriculture. Furthermore, we conclude that this transition cannot but be rooted in promising, innovative practices that embody the potential to challenge conventional scientific approaches to sustainable agricultural development. More space should be created for ‘smart’ experimentation exploring and evaluating the potentialities of different transition paths.
An increasing number of scholars have recognized trust as an important factor in
governance processes. However, theoretical and empirical analyses of process trust, or trust in the course and outcome of policy processes, are scarce. This paper builds a theoretical framework to further the understanding of process trust. Four elements of process trust are elaborated upon:
(1) set-up of the process; (2) institutional trust; (3) organizational trust; (4) individual trust. The way that monitoring can help or hinder the formation of trust is explored. It is argued that
monitoring enhances process trust provided that actors perceive monitoring as a collaborative effort. This argument is underpinned by the analysis of a governance process on landscape management in a Dutch municipality, where a local co-operative and the municipality agreed on the members of a monitoring team and the way of monitoring.
The integration of nature management, landscape and environmental concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has gained momentum with the CAP reforms adopted in June 2003. The report explores instruments and approaches that contribute to the inte-gration of nature conservation and landscape concerns into the CAP. A broader use of the CAP instruments might help to achieve nature types in the Netherlands.
In this paper the case of the environmental co-operatives VEL and VANLA is reviewed in terms of co-evolving technical and institutional change and the strategic lessons to be learned for a pro-active management of such complex technical-institutional design processes. Facing the many-sided crisis in agriculture the two co-operatives developed a radically different approach. The aim is to re-ground agriculture in local agro-ecological processes following the approach of lowering external inputs (i.e., material inputs, capital and labour). The results are promising: a system-innovation is emerging out of a wide range of connected novel operational practices (i.e., novelties) including technical as well as institutional aspects. The findings of VEL and VANLA stress once again the need for a simultaneous redesign of technical and institutional change to facilitate a transition towards a more sustainable agriculture. Furthermore, we conclude that this transition cannot but be rooted in promising, innovative practices that embody the potential to challenge conventional scientific approaches to sustainable agricultural development. More space should be created for ‘smart’ experimentation exploring and evaluating the potentialities of different transition paths.
This article describes the Nutrient Management Project of the environmental co-operatives VEL and VANLA as a field laboratory. A field laboratory is defined as a heterogeneous collection of inter-linked scientific studies performed by several actors within a specific field, but — as in normal laboratories — with some protection against outside interference and disturbance. The Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA demonstrates several characteristics of field laboratories. Firstly, in the project, dairy farmers and scientists carry out joint research using different sources of knowledge. Secondly, apart from research the actors are engaged in changing the location, thereby developing new knowledge and practices. In the case of VEL and VANLA this means developing the fields and farms towards sustain-ability. Thirdly, the actors thoughtfully experiment with several research methodologies to gain understanding on a variety of issues. So within the field laboratory of VEL and VANLA there is heterogeneity in themes, disciplines and methodologies. Simultaneously a systems perspective is created as an interpretative scheme that links up all the different activities. Finally, within VEL and VANLA, alignment among practices, research and the institutional context is essential for the continuation of the research activities.
The practice of farming implies a continuous process of re-moulding and re-balancing of resources. Normally, this process is slow and hardly noticeable, but in times of transition towards sustainability it is accelerated and becomes more visible. Re-moulding and re-balancing require a careful and multifaceted monitoring as well as a high degree of involvement of the farmers concerned. This article is an overview that documents several aspects of the changes realized by two farmer co-operatives in the northern Netherlands: Vereniging Eastermar's Lansdouwe (VEL) and Vereniging Agrarisch Natuur en Landschapsonderhoud Achtkarspelen (VANLA). It is shown that farmers process and manage manure, silages and diets. Emphasis is given to indications that the newly emerging balances are characterized by high levels of N efficiency. In a final combination of beta and gamma approaches it is shown that the goal-oriented practices of the VEL and VANLA farmers clearly indicate new trajectories towards and prospects for sustainability. Furthermore it is shown that recognition of relevant heterogeneity is crucial and that inter-farm comparisons, careful integration of beta and gamma approaches and multivariate modes of analysis are needed.
Multi-functionality is a currently fashionable argument, at least within the EU, for continued support of the farming sector. However, there is a very substantial danger that this argument will be used, and be seen to being used, as a façade for traditional support and protection. If so, then the current trend towards liberalised agricultural markets, on which much of the developing world depends, will be frustrated, at least de facto of not de jure. Nevertheless, there is a substantial kernel of truth in the multi-functional argument - farming does matter to many cultures and communities over and above its marketable surplus and the incomes so generated. It follows that any negotiations aimed at liberalising agricultural trade have to take these arguments seriously. To do so requires that the critical elements of the debate be widely understood. This paper has outlined these critical elements. Despite the apparent attraction, the policy of production-related payments to farmers cannot be justified as payments for multi-functional provision. Indeed, such payments are just as likely to reduce the multi-functional performance of the industry. The paper argues that there are ways in which quasi-market systems can be employed to correct for the market failures and deficiencies implicit in the notion of multi-functionality. In particular, conservation, amenity and recreation trusts can be used effectively to resolve the twin difficulties of proper public valuation of agriculture's provision of public goods and externalities and of appropriate and effective delivery of care (conservation, amenity, recreational and environmental) goods. The paper further argues that proper compensation to existing supported farmers is a necessary, justified and separate condition for policy reform. To muddle and confuse multi-functionality with compensation, as is apparent in much of the rhetoric, if not analysis surrounding multi-functional reform proposals, is to seriously threaten agricultural trade liberalisation, without any offsetting benefits of improving the multi-functional performance of the industry. It would be a pity if the trend towards more liberal trade in agriculture is frustrated by ill-considered attempts to cope with the obvious and legitimate multi-functional aspects of the industry, and by confusion between this requirement and the requirement for proper compensation for policy-induced losses in asset values.
An important implication of agricultural modernization has been the break-down of interlinkages between farming, ecology and society. Historically, farming systems evolved from the specific responses of farming communities to local ecological conditions. The totality of regionalized farming systems arising out of this co-production moulded the countryside into an ‘archipelago’ of differentiated ruralities. During the period of agricultural modernization, the nature of co-production changed thoroughly. The natural elements in co-production were increasingly artificialized or replaced by industrial artefacts. This paper analyses the emergence of environmental cooperatives in the Netherlands as a movement towards a renewed embedding of farming in its local environment. Environmental cooperatives are local farmers associations that promote activities related to sustainable agriculture and rural development and claim to be actively involved in effectuating rural policies in their locale. Since the foundation of the first cooperative in 1992, numbers have rapidly grown to over 100. This paper examines the genesis and practices of environmental cooperatives and assesses their socio-economic and ecological impact. The importance lies most of all, so the authors contend, in that they represent valuable ‘field laboratories’ for building stimulating and supportive institutional contexts for remodelling Dutch farming along the lines of environmental and economic sustainability. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The Agenda 2000 reforms established a separate rural development policy, the second pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). This has received relatively limited funding to date, although there will be some increase following from the 2003 reforms of the CAP. This shift in approach towards a rural policy has been widely canvassed but slow to materialize. Policies linked to agricultural production will be unable to resolve the farm income problem and there are limits to the extent to which diversification incomes can act as a substitute. Economic and social change in rural areas means that agricultural production activities are of less relevance. The adoption of sustainable development as an objective has implications for the way in which both natural and social capital should be treated. At the same time the approach to rural development within the CAP remains at a relatively immature stage. A mainstream policy would direct payments towards specific outputs, promote consistency across space, through time and between economic sectors. Implementation of policy should increasingly focus on specific individual and local solutions and give more attention to the development of social capital.
Reflexive Modernity is bringing myriad ‘flexible spaces’ into being in which socio-economic development can be animated and even defined. The act of territorial identity construction utilises historical and cultural resources and thus represents an emerging form of local governance. The paper examines how this focus on cultural–territorial identity feeds back to the psychological well-being of individuals, both within and without the locality. Reflexive Modernity helps us to understand the dialectical relations between Self-identity and broad social change. The geographical focus is simultaneously global and local. Against this backdrop, actors are engaging with Reflexive Modernity through various forms of strategic intervention. This paper supports calls for a change on emphasis, away from rural development and towards territories or disadvantaged social groups.
This book presents a disciplined, qualitative exploration of case study methods by drawing from naturalistic, holistic, ethnographic, phenomenological and biographic research methods. Robert E. Stake uses and annotates an actual case study to answer such questions as: How is the case selected? How do you select the case which will maximize what can be learned? How can what is learned from one case be applied to another? How can what is learned from a case be interpreted? In addition, the book covers: the differences between quantitative and qualitative approaches; data-gathering including document review; coding, sorting and pattern analysis; the roles of the researcher; triangulation; and reporting.
This paper reviews the contribution farmer controlled businesses (FCB) currently make and could make to the future prosperity of farm businesses in the UK. It argues that the expansion of FCBs in the UK will allow farmers to secure markets for their products and capture the increasing value of food. This will need farmers to radically change their investment policy: to move away from on-farm investment towards off-farm investment into agricultural supply chains.
This paper argues that the possible shift towards conservation-oriented attitudes of farmers through agri-environmental scheme participation should be seen as a key indicator for assessing the ‘effectiveness’ of agri-environmental policy. Through the analysis of two agri-environmental schemes in the UK, the ESA and Countryside Stewardship schemes, the study suggests that schemes attract different types of farmers and have different results with regard to shifting farmers' attitudes towards conservation. The paper concludes that there is little evidence yet that the ESA scheme is contributing to changes in farmers' attitudes towards conservation, largely because the scheme is aimed at maintenance rather than change. The Countryside Stewardship scheme, meanwhile, generally enrols more conservation-oriented farmers and also shows greater potential for shifting farmers' attitudes, mainly because it is aimed at enhancement of wildlife habitats which often require farmers to change farm management practices. Results indicate that future policies should put more emphasis on scheme monitoring and farmer environmental education in order to help move farmers along the conservation spectrum. In the ESA scheme, management agreement tiers that require more substantial changes to farm management practices towards conservation-oriented farming should be made compulsory in order to ensure that farmers are not only ‘reacting’ to schemes, but that also help farmers re-think their environmental management practices. The Countryside Stewardship scheme should be further expanded because of its appeal to conservation-oriented farmers and the resulting potential for sustainable environmental conservation of the countryside.
An integrated, landscape-scale approach to countryside management argues for whole farm or business targeting, and for inter-farm co-operation to enhance current Agri-environmental Policy (AEP) and to meet Agri-environmental Policy objectives. This paper describes the preliminary results of a study in the Lake District Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA), using the ArcView GIS. Spatial data describing the characteristics of farms, farm businesses and farmers are analysed. It is suggested that there is scope for spatially adjacent farms to co-operate through multi-farm management agreements, to achieve and advance the stated aims of the Lakes ESA. The discussion focuses on the potential of AEP schemes to be reoriented away from their present focus on individual farms and holdings, towards a broader geographical coverage and an integrated approach to the management of land across ownership boundaries.
This paper analyses farmers’ networking strategies for sustainable agricultural development. The focus is on internal barriers of farmers’ networks with respect to the management of the group and collective learning processes. These aspects determine to an extent the success or failure of collective strategies. Based upon case study material we will draw lessons and present ideas on how management and learning can be enhanced. We argue that in collective strategies the focus should not only be on the goal of the group, but that attention to the process of cooperation such as safeguarding coherence, monitoring and evaluation of goals and views, shared responsibility and balanced leadership is a prerequisite for effective collective action.
The modernization paradigm, which for many decades dominated agricultural practices, policies and science, is gradually being replaced by a rural development paradigm. The emerging rural development paradigm calls, amongst other things, for a new approach to policy-making, steering and control, in other words, for a new approach to rural governance. The need for new forms of rural governance is embedded in current political and scientific debates on shifts in multi-level governance that occur in a variety of socio-economic domains. Within the domain of agriculture and rural development, self-organization and self-regulation emerge as a new mode of rural governance. Environmental co-operatives are a promising expression of this. They are characterized by new institutional relations between state agencies and the agricultural community, new social networks of trust at local level and the re-embedding of farming in its local social and ecological context. In the Frisian Woodlands, the environmental co-operatives VEL and VANLA succeeded in building new local social networks of trust and in re-integrating dairy farming, nature conservation and landscape management. However, further development towards self-regulation is hampered by a lack of institutional support, particularly from national government authorities.
This article explores the advantages and risks of a new form of self-regulation in the Netherlands. The focal point is the environmental cooperative: a regional organization in which farmers collaborate to integrate environmental values into their production process. The body of this article begins with a discussion of the background of these innovative collectives. It then examines a few concrete examples in greater detail. The question guiding the discussion is if and how the environmental cooperative can contribute to such a broad national planning goal as a more sustainable development of the rural area.
This thesis focused on land use in which agriculture is combined with wildlife and landscape management. The objective of the study was to analyse the design of contractual arrangements for wildlife and landscape management by farmers. An important method used in this thesis was a literary approach combined with statistical tools using data from mail surveys. The literary approach is based on theory and makes use of close reasoning. Other methods used were formal models concerning the decision to contract and the consequences of contracting at the farm level. This thesis has concentrated on the supply side, especially on the institutional organisation. The research focussed on institutional aspects of wildlife and landscape management and contributed to the study of wildlife and landscape because it helps to establish a link between supply and demand. This study has shown that contractual arrangements and environmental co-operatives are suitable arrangements for the provision of wildlife and landscape, and that they deserve attention from the viewpoint of empirical science as well as of policy makers.
This article describes the Nutrient Management Project of the environmental co-operatives VEL and VANLA as a field laboratory. A field laboratory is defined as a heterogeneous collection of inter-linked scientific studies performed by several actors within a specific field, but – as in normal laboratories – with some protection against outside interference and disturbance. The Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA demonstrates several characteristics of field laboratories. Firstly, in the project, dairy farmers and scientists carry out joint research using different sources of knowledge. Secondly, apart from research the actors are engaged in changing the location, thereby developing new knowledge and practices. In the case of VEL and VANLA this means developing the fields and farms towards sustainability. Thirdly, the actors thoughtfully experiment with several research methodologies to gain understanding on a variety of issues. So within the field laboratory of VEL and VANLA there is heterogeneity in themes, disciplines and methodologies. Simultaneously a systems perspective is created as an interpretative scheme that links up all the different activities. Finally, within VEL and VANLA, alignment among practices, research and the institutional context is essential for the continuation of the research activities.
The practice of farming implies a continuous process of re-moulding and re-balancing of resources. Normally, this process is slow and hardly noticeable, but in times of transition towards sustainability it is accelerated and becomes more visible. Re-moulding and re-balancing require a careful and multifaceted monitoring as well as a high degree of involvement of the farmers concerned. This article is an overview that documents several aspects of the changes realized by two farmer co-operatives in the northern Netherlands: Vereniging Eastermar’s Lansdouwe (VEL) and Vereniging Agrarisch Natuur en Landschapsonderhoud Achtkarspelen (VANLA). It is shown that farmers process and manage manure, silages and diets. Emphasis is given to indications that the newly emerging balances are characterized by high levels of N efficiency. In a final combination of beta and gamma approaches it is shown that the goal-oriented practices of the VEL and VANLA farmers clearly indicate new trajectories towards and prospects for sustainability. Furthermore it is shown that recognition of relevant heterogeneity is crucial and that inter-farm comparisons, careful integration of beta and gamma approaches and multivariate modes of analysis are needed.
This book is not available through Chester Digital Repository. This book discusses marketing research, planning a research project, sampling, surveys, questionnaires, qualitative research, observations and experiments, quantitative data analysis, and marketing decision-support systems. There are also several case studies.
This paper offers an ecologically-based view of land and land value, building upon the multiproduct nature of ecosystems and upon landscape ecology. The paper questions the ability of markets to create optimal landscapes, even when traditional methods of internalizing externalities are applied, and concludes that attempting a complete valuation of ecosystems is quixotic. Achieving sustainable landscapes requires both sufficient ecological knowledge and institutions capable of overcoming landscape-scale market failure. Accordingly, the paper examines forms of public and private ownership in the United States to assess how well particular institutional conditions might facilitate ecological adaptation there.
Multi-functionality is a currently fashionable argument, especially within the EU, for continued support of the farming sector. However, there is a substantial danger that this will be used, and be seen to being used, as a facade for continued traditional support and protection. If so, the current trend towards liberalised agricultural markets, on which much of the developing world depends, will be frustrated. Nevertheless, farming does matter to many communities, over and above its marketable surplus and the incomes so generated. It follows that any negotiations aimed at liberalising agricultural trade have to take these arguments seriously. To do so requires that the critical elements of the debate be widely understood. This paper outlines these critical elements, in the light of a previous contribution from Hodge (2000). It argues that there are ways in which quasi-market systems can be used to correct market failures implicit in the notion of multi-functionality. It also argues that proper compensation to existing supported farmers is a necessary and separate condition for sensible policy reform. Much of the commentary on farm trade liberalisation confuses the two separate conditions for reform: multi-functionality and compensation. This confusion threatens progress towards agricultural trade liberalisation, without generating any reliable benefits of a more multifunctional agriculture.
Renewing the Countryside
- R Broekhuizen
- L Van Kep
- H Oostindie
- J D Van Der Ploeg
Broekhuizen, R., van Kep, L., Oostindie, H., van der Ploeg, J.D., 1997.
Renewing the Countryside. Missen, Dotinchem, The Netherlands.
Influencing Farmer Behaviour and Aiding the Delivery of Sustainable Agriculture through Facilitation of Farmer Discussion Groups: A Defra Challenge Fund Project Final Report
DEFRA, 2005a. Influencing Farmer Behaviour and Aiding the Delivery
of Sustainable Agriculture through Facilitation of Farmer Discussion
Groups: A Defra Challenge Fund Project Final Report.
£17 bn big idea that can make UK a better place
- N Mathiason
Mathiason, N., 2006. £17 bn big idea that can make UK a better place.
Observer Social Report, p. 1.
Collaborating for Profit: Case Studies from the UK Regions
- English Farming
- Food Partnership
English Farming and Food Partnership, 2005a. Collaborating for Profit:
Case Studies from the UK Regions. [Online] /www.effp.comS.
Cherished Heartland: Future of the Uplands in Wales
- P Midmore
- R Moore-Colyer
Midmore, P., Moore-Colyer, R., 2005. Cherished Heartland: Future of the
Uplands in Wales. Brecknockshire Agricultural Society.
Environmental co-operatives as institutional arrangement for creating coherence. The socio-economic impact of management agreements: an exploratory study. Working Paper for the research programme ‘The Socio-economic Impact of Rural Development Policies: Realities and Potentials, IMPACT
- H Renting
- J D Van Der Ploeg
Renting, H., van der Ploeg, J.D., 2001a. Environmental co-operatives as
institutional arrangement for creating coherence. The socio-economic
impact of management agreements: an exploratory study. Working
Paper for the Research Programme 'The Socio-economic Impact of
Rural Development Policies: Realities and Potentials, IMPACT'
(FAIR CT 98-4288), Case Study NL3.
Co-operative Approaches to Sustainable Development
OECD, 1998. Co-operative Approaches to Sustainable Development.
OECD, Paris.
undated. Discussion by foreign partner
- P Pieroni
Pieroni, P., undated. Discussion by foreign partner. In: Oerlemans, N.J.,
Hess, E. (Eds.), Agriculture Nature Organisation 'Den Haneker'.
Centre for Agriculture and the Environment (CLM), Culemborg, the
Netherlands.
BIOfACT country study of the Netherlands: research in 'Natural Resources Management
- C Graveland
- T Van Rheenen
- F Brouwer
Graveland, C., van Rheenen, T., Brouwer, F., 2004. BIOfACT country
study of the Netherlands: research in 'Natural Resources Management'. LEI, The Hague.
Opening to all, England's coast trail. The Observer
- Anon
Anon, 2005. Opening to all, England's coast trail. The Observer, London,
p. 7.
Timetable for the Water Framework Directive
DEFRA, 2005c. Timetable for the Water Framework Directive.
undated. Agriculture nature organisation ‘Den Hâneker
- N J Oerlemans
- E Hess
Oerlemans, N.J., Hess, E., undated. Agriculture nature organisation 'Den
HaˆnekerHaˆneker'. Centre for Agriculture and Environment (CLM), Culemborg, the Netherlands.
Farming and food: a sustainable future
Policy Commission, 2002. Farming and food: a sustainable future. [Online].
Public Goods from Private Land-Why Nature needs Farming: Executive Summary
CLA, 2005. Public Goods from Private Land-Why Nature needs
Farming: Executive Summary, p. 11.
Challenges in Creating Local Agri-environmental Cooperation Action Amongst Farmers and other Stakeholders. The Macaulay Institute
- B Davies
- K Blackstock
- K Brown
- P Shannon
Davies, B., Blackstock, K., Brown, K., Shannon, P., 2004. Challenges in
Creating Local Agri-environmental Cooperation Action Amongst
Farmers and other Stakeholders. The Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen.
Environmental Co-operation and Institutional Change: Theories and Policies for European Agriculture
- G Dijk
- J Sol
Dijk, G., Sol, J., 2002. Environmental co-operatives as entrepreneurial
instruments for farmers: concepts and experience. In: Hagedorn,
K. (Ed.), Environmental Co-operation and Institutional Change:
Theories and Policies for European Agriculture. Edward Elgar, UK,
pp. 112-125.